A hazard direction study was undertaken to find possible hazards that may happen alongside the renovation of Great Northern Hotel. The main executive of RAM-led pool, which has been selected by King ‘s Cross Central to renovate the Great Northern Hotel, appointed our squad to place, analyze and develop proper recommendations for pull offing possible hazards.
Our squad used a cause-effect analysis based on a set of decisions identified after several meetings with experts and brainstorming Sessionss to foreground countries of possible concern for the undertaking. Another method used was to analyse historical records and studies from old building undertakings.
The consequences of the study outline the fact that, without an accurate hazard direction applied before puting the baseline for the undertaking, assorted factors may impact the overall continuance and the necessary budget to renovate the Great Northern Hotel.
2. Introduction AND METHODOLOGY
This study was requested by the main executive of RAM-led pool, before the beginning of Great Northern Hotel renovation. Our squad was asked to subject its findings by 26th of May, 2010.
The intent of this study is to look into what are the possible menaces for this renovation undertaking and to analyse how their impact can be minimized. Our squad has responded to this petition by developing a list of possible hazards that might impact the renovation undertaking and by transporting out a thorough hazard analysis, as understanding the nature of hazards is a stipulation for a proper response, and besides by proposing appropriate recommendations for minimising negative impact on the undertaking. The aim of this study is non to extinguish hazard or uncertainness, but to take a cardinal expression into the hereafter of the renovation undertaking and to place possible menaces.
By hazard, our squad understands the “ possibility of something go oning that can impact the chances of accomplishing undertaking ends ” ( Maylor, 2003, page 192 ) . However, our squad besides took into consideration several other hazard definitions, all of them underlying the same thought. Some illustrations of definitions our squad has worked with are listed bellow:
Hazards are those factors that may do a failure to run into the undertaking ‘s aims ( Burke, 2003, page 253 )
Hazard is the expected effects of an event and the chance that the event might happen ( Kendrick, 2003, page 2 )
The possibility of enduring injury or loss ( Maylor, 2003, page 192 )
Sing its restrictions of placing all hazards that might impact the renovation undertaking – as it is about impossible to anticipate all future events – our squad used these definitions in order to sketch major countries of hazards for building undertakings, particularly for the renovation undertaking.
To undertake hazards, our squad applied the hazard direction program proposed by Burke ( 2003 ) , which included the undermentioned stairss:
Identify and categorise hazards
Quantify and prioritise hazards
Develop hazard response/managing hazards
Hazard designation is considered to be the most important portion of hazard direction procedure ( Burke, 2003 ) , as hazards that are non identified can hold negative effects on the undertaking. For this measure, our squad chose to see multiple techniques in sketching major countries of hazard for the renovation undertaking. Our chief method implied categorising hazards, as this method can take to the designation of specific jobs ( Kendrick, 2003 ) . Our squad chiefly looked at undertaking ‘s aims to specify possible external and internal beginnings for hazards.
In making this, our squad focused on some of the methods indicated by Burke ( 2003 ) , such as holding meeting with experts and with members of the forces to portion hazards experiences – as old experience can lend to put on the line designation – , holding changeless brainstorming Sessionss and besides analysing historical records and studies on old building undertakings. After roll uping consequences from the methods mentioned, our squad applied a cause-effect analysis to place hazards for the renovation undertaking.
After holding identified a scope of possible hazards, our squad tried to mensurate the impact they could hold on the undertaking. Measuring how likely an event is to happen and find the extent of the consequence of the event ( Maylor, 2003, page 195 ) is known in undertaking hazard direction as hazard quantification process. Risk quantification besides implies set abouting a hazard precedence analysis ( Burke, 2003 ) , in order to set up what countries of hazards to turn to foremost. For this manoeuvre, a Probability/Impact Matrix has been created to mensurate the degree of hazard and to prioritise possible hazards.
Concluding measure undertaken by our squad was to develop responses for the identified hazards. In hazard direction, after placing hazards, they can either be reduced or mitigated in some manner ( Maylor, 2003 ) . There are several processs to react to hazards ( Burke, 2003 ) , among which:
Eliminate hazards – avoiding the hazard by taking cause ( Burke, 2003, page 262 )
Mitigate hazards – cut downing hazard chance and impact ( Burke, 2003, page 262 )
Deflect risks – transportation the hazard to another party ( Burke, 2003, page 263 )
Accept hazards
As extinguishing hazards wholly can non ever be a successful process, our squad has chosen to unite the above mentioned processs and offered solutions for extinguishing, extenuating and debaring hazards.
3. Findings
3.1 GENERAL CONSTRUCTION RISKS
Before naming the consequences of the analysis undertaken for the renovation undertaking, this study will sketch some of the hazards that are by and large impacting building undertakings. This information will lend to a better apprehension of possible hazards a building undertaking may connote and it can act upon portion of the determinations refering farther hazard monitoring and control for the renovation undertaking.
Based on informations collected from meetings with experts and with members of the forces, from brainstorming Sessionss and from the analysis of different studies of old building undertakings, out squad concluded that there are several ways of sorting hazards in building undertakings.
Our squad has elaborated the following categorization to underscore possible countries of hazards for building undertakings:
Fiscal hazards – which can include labour and material work or excess charges from contractors or providers
Time hazards – which can include holds caused by different factors, major disagreements between estimation and existent continuances
Technological hazards – which can include misinterpreted building processs or design premises or unplanned site conditions
Socioeconomic factors – such as environmental organisations or economic instability
Organizational factors – such as communicating between workers, contractual dealingss
Operational hazards – such as building defects, labour hazards, quality inadequacies
By and large, informations analyzed revealed the fact that building undertakings are more inclined to hazards, as they rely on multiple factors to accomplish their ends, such as stuff providers, labour force, site conditions, quality surveillance and fixed budgets. Furthermore, consequences besides suggested that building undertakings have a higher grade of uncertainness than other types of undertakings, as they can be easy influenced and affected by upwind status or political and economic clime.
The decision our squad reached is that the renovation undertaking can besides be affected by the above mentioned factors and that a elaborate hazard direction program is mandatory to be developed for the undertaking to make its ends.
3.2 IDENTIFYING RISKS FOR REFURBISHMENT PROJECT
Consequences collected from our meetings with experts and forces members, from our brainstorming Sessionss and from the analysis of old studies on building undertakings indicated that for the renovation of Great Northern Hotel multiple countries of hazards should be taken into consideration.
From the countries identified, our squad will sketch through this study the first major classs of hazards that could impact the renovation undertaking. These classs are:
Time hazards
Costss hazards
Quality hazards
A cause-effect analysis has been undertaken in order to place clip, costs and quality hazards by sing the aims of the renovation undertaking. The findings are listed in the undermentioned pages.
For a better apprehension of our analysis, our squad included the aims of the renovation undertaking. The undertaking has three chief aims:
Refurbish the Victorian-build Great Northern Hotel by early 2011
Constructing a new dress shop hotel, with 94 luxury sleeping rooms, a saloon and a eating house by late 2011
Open the hotel in clip for London Olympics 2012
By using a cause-effect analysis, our squad identified hazards on clip, costs and quality, their causes and effects. The hazards are listed in the undermentioned pages:
I. Time hazards
Severe holds in renovating the hotel
Major differences between estimation clip and existent clip in building the new dress shop, the saloon and the eating house
Grand gap postponed with two months
Workers work stoppage
Causes:
Forces causes – unwellness, deceases
Technical jobs – jobs with work equipment
Problems with providers – equipments non delivered on clip
Weak communicating among forces
Changes in contract between client and contractor
Lack of hazard direction among workers
Organizational civilization struggles
Weather volatility
Lack of item work programs from contractor
Necessary blessings non given on clip
Effectss:
Severe holds
Slow advancement
Delaies in money allotment for work equipment
Undertaking failure
II. Costss Risks
Insufficient budget for renovation
Higher costs for building of new dress shop
Currency fluctuation
Hotel non opened in clip for the Olympics
Causes:
Additions in labour and stuff costs from providers
Higher measures from contractor on work advancement
Instable economic system
Emergency state of affairs, such as excess equipment or excess forces
Effectss:
Over-budget
Slow advancement
Activity stopped
Undertaking failure
III. Quality hazards
Poor edifice status
Low quality renovation
Weak construction for new building
Law quality of stuff used
Causes:
Unstable construction of old edifice
Lack of professionalism
Misinterpretation of work undertakings
Incorrect design premises
Effectss:
Delaies caused by extra plants
Aims non achieved on clip
Over-budget
Undertaking failure
Hazard Quantification
Following measure undertaken by our squad was risk quantification, in order to mensurate hazards chance and to set up their precedence. This study includes a Probability/Impact Matrix for the hazards identified.
The Matrix has been developed utilizing the analysis consequences following our meetings with experts and staff members, our brainstorming Sessionss and from the analysis of old studies on building undertakings.
Risks Probability/Impact Matrix – Probability and Impact have been rated on a graduated table from 1 to 4, where 1 = Unlikely/Minor, 2 = Possible/Moderate, 3 = Likely/Major, 4 = Almost certain/Critical
Hazards
Probability
Impact
1. Severe holds in renovating the hotel
3
4
2. Major differences between estimation and existent clip in building new dress shop, saloon and eating house
2
3
3. Grand opening postponed with 2 months
2
2
4. Workers work stoppage
2
1
5. Insufficient budget for renovation
2
3
6. Higher costs for building of new dress shop
2
2
7.Currency fluctuation
2
1
8.Hotel non opened in clip for the Olympics
3
4
9.Poor edifice status
3
4
10.Low quality renovation
1
2
11.Weak construction for new building
2
3
12.Low quality of stuffs used
1
1
By evaluation Probability and Impact for the identified hazards, our squad besides prioritized them, as follows:
I. Major hazards ( Major Impact, Likely Probability ) :
Severe holds in renovating the hotel
Hotel non opened in clip for the Olympics
Poor edifice status
II. Moderate hazards ( Moderate Impact/Possible Probability ) :
Major differences between estimation and existent clip in building new dress shop, saloon and eating house
Grand gap postponed with 2 months
Insufficient budget for renovation
Higher costs for building of new dress shop
Weak construction for new building
III. Minor hazards ( Minor Impact/Unlikely Probability )
Workers work stoppage
Currency fluctuation
Low quality renovation
Low quality of stuffs used
RISK RESPONSE AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the consequences of hazard designation, quantification and precedence, our squad makes the undermentioned recommendations:
For extinguishing hazards, the client/contractor should:
Obtain necessary blessings before get downing the renovation
Check stuff quality before get downing the renovation
Before subscribing contract with providers, include statements on fixed costs and material bringing schedule/replacement
Have more meetings between client and contractor before subscribing the contract, to clear up each item
Badly check workers background before engaging them
For extenuating hazards, the client/contractor should:
Name a hazard direction commission and include a hazard direction program
Carry out status studies and step studies to set up edifice status
Elaborate a hazard direction program focused on persons
Monitor timetables and inquire for hebdomadal item work programs and cogent evidence on advancement
Include hebdomadal quality controls
Allocate excess money for unplanned events in the tendering period
Include forenoon meetings with workers to explicate inside informations on undertakings
Offer common tiffin for workers to better communicating
For debaring hazards, the client/contractor should:
Hire an Audit company to maintain path of truth in Billingss and work advancement
4. CONCLUSIONS
This study outlines what possible hazards can a renovation undertaking brush alongside its continuance. By utilizing appropriate methods for placing the hazards and their causes, the study highlights what impact these hazards can hold on the undertaking and to what extent they can be measured and prioritized. The study besides includes a set of recommendations for extinguishing, extenuating or debaring possible hazards.
By doing this study, our squad reached the undermentioned decisions:
Most determinations in building undertakings are based on uncomplete information with an associated degree of uncertainness about the result ( Burke, 2003, page 252 )
In construction/ renovation undertakings, degree of uncertainness can make a high degree in multiple countries
No undertaking should get down before developing a hazard direction program
Pull offing hazards should follow fixed stairss – Designation, Quantification, Prioritizing and Risk response – and utilize as many beginnings as possible when making these stairss
Hazard response should unite different processs to extinguish, extenuate, debar or accept hazards
Before make up one’s minding for one of these processs, a cost/benefit analysis should be undertaken
For refurbishment undertakings it is really hard to place all hazards, as they are more inclined to hazards than other types of undertakings and can be easy affected by political relations or by economic clime
This study besides includes end products from Microsoft Projects on undertaking programming, resources, undertaking and fundss developed by our squad, in the Appendices chapter.
This study counts 2365 words.
