All projects are remote from each other. If we mean from the Procurement point of view, that is another topic.
However, whether we are working in the Middle East, US, Latinamerican countries or else, email and video conference is essencial.
The last 3 refinaries we built in Venezuela, the engineering was prepared in Houston and Caracas, major equipments were fabricates in Japan, rest of purchases were gotten all over the world and the work site was in Punto Fijo, Falcon in the middle of the desert.
I had similar experience in West Africa and Turkmenistan.
I do not see a sucessful project to be executed without an trustfull IT platform, among others factors and valuable resources.
best regards
Ramon Granados
Member for
24 years 6 months
Member for24 years6 months
Submitted by Tomas Rivera on Thu, 2004-09-30 15:53
I agree with what Bernard is saying; working remote does require that you have to be more pro-active in communicating. And there are some aspects of work that are more suited to the idea of remote working than others; projects that are relatively short and require very intense input are probably less suitable than those that are of a longer duration.
Certainly, preparing a Claim Submission with a supporting Schedule Impact Analysis can be successfully done, away from the hustle and bustle of a site or Head Office once you have all the important information to hand.
Similarly, provision of Reports and Schedules that need to be updated periodically can be issued from any location, although setting up a Baseline Schedule, when you need to communicate with a number of disciplines may be difficult to do from a remote location.
Mind you, I know of offices where people 3 metres apart only communicate through e-mail!
Just to clarify, my "lazy" comment was not meant in the context of people not getting their work done. It was meant to highlight the addition of an obstacle to effective communication.
I cannot fathom any planner or scheduler planning or executing a refinery turnaround maintenance project by remote.
Im sure that circumstances may be more favorable in other industries or other capacities (like post-project schedule analysis), but the cost savings for remote support would have to be pretty substancial for me to accept what I perceive to be additional risks for a breakdown in communication for planning and execution where a high level of interactivity is required among the project team.
As well as saving time travelling to an office each day there are other advantages to working remotely in that it is more conducive to focussing on the job in hand and not be sidetracked by minor, unnecessary requests from others.
Obviously communications and team building factors are important. The ideal would seem to be to spend at least one day per week at the office to pick up on the elements of a project which your colleagues may be reluctant to discuss otherwise.
Working at home does requires strong self-discipline.
Member for
21 years 5 months
Member for21 years5 months
Submitted by Chris Oggham on Thu, 2004-09-30 03:19
Im not sure Bernard is quite correct. While all humans might by nature be lazy, it doesnt follow that because one or more are at remote locations they arent going to get their work done.
While it is desirable to have the whole team working at the same location, my organisation regularly delivers projects on time and to budget where the team is geographically separated. Provided all members of the team are fully aware of the work to be undertaken, timescale, quality standards and so on are specified clearly and correctly there should be no problem.
Communication is important, but video-conferencing, e-mail are extremely useful for meetings and the transfer of essential documents. Provided team members do communicate nothing should "slip through the cracks" where geographical separation occurs. If they dont communicate, it isnt going to matter whether they are geographically separated or in the same room, there will be problems.
As far as political or psychological reasons for participants to hold back or sabotage efforts are concerned, processes can be put into place to reduce or eliminate the potential for this sort of activity.
In short, if you set it up properly within the project, team members working from remote locations can be just as effective as having the whole project team at the same location.
Chris Oggham
Member for
22 years 11 months
Member for22 years11 months
Submitted by Bernard Ertl on Tue, 2004-09-28 10:13
Humans are by nature lazy. When all participants in an endeavor are not present, it adds one more obstacle to effective communication. Little things that may be very important are more likely to "slip through the cracks" if more effort is required to communicate IMO.
Also, sometimes, there are political or psychological reasons for participants to either hold back or sabotage efforts. When all parties are present, it is more likely for these issues to be mitigated before they become real problems.
Member for
21 years 4 monthsRE: Working by remote
Hello Planners:
I am not sure what we mean by "remote project".
All projects are remote from each other. If we mean from the Procurement point of view, that is another topic.
However, whether we are working in the Middle East, US, Latinamerican countries or else, email and video conference is essencial.
The last 3 refinaries we built in Venezuela, the engineering was prepared in Houston and Caracas, major equipments were fabricates in Japan, rest of purchases were gotten all over the world and the work site was in Punto Fijo, Falcon in the middle of the desert.
I had similar experience in West Africa and Turkmenistan.
I do not see a sucessful project to be executed without an trustfull IT platform, among others factors and valuable resources.
best regards
Ramon Granados
Member for
24 years 6 monthsRE: Working by remote
For those of you who have worked remotely:
Have you used videoconferencing successfully?
What kind of set up is needed in terms of hardware and software?
I am thinking for myself, an independent consultant working from a home office.
Thank you
Tomas Rivera
Altek System
Detailed scheduling of high performance
construciont projects
Member for
21 years 4 monthsRE: Working by remote
I agree with what Bernard is saying; working remote does require that you have to be more pro-active in communicating. And there are some aspects of work that are more suited to the idea of remote working than others; projects that are relatively short and require very intense input are probably less suitable than those that are of a longer duration.
Certainly, preparing a Claim Submission with a supporting Schedule Impact Analysis can be successfully done, away from the hustle and bustle of a site or Head Office once you have all the important information to hand.
Similarly, provision of Reports and Schedules that need to be updated periodically can be issued from any location, although setting up a Baseline Schedule, when you need to communicate with a number of disciplines may be difficult to do from a remote location.
Mind you, I know of offices where people 3 metres apart only communicate through e-mail!
Sometimes the remoteness can be in your head!
Cheers,
Stuart
www.rosmartin.com
Member for
22 years 11 monthsRE: Working by remote
Just to clarify, my "lazy" comment was not meant in the context of people not getting their work done. It was meant to highlight the addition of an obstacle to effective communication.
I cannot fathom any planner or scheduler planning or executing a refinery turnaround maintenance project by remote.
Im sure that circumstances may be more favorable in other industries or other capacities (like post-project schedule analysis), but the cost savings for remote support would have to be pretty substancial for me to accept what I perceive to be additional risks for a breakdown in communication for planning and execution where a high level of interactivity is required among the project team.
Bernard Ertl
InterPlan Systems - ATC Professional Shutdown / Turnaround Management System
Member for
22 years 4 monthsRE: Working by remote
As well as saving time travelling to an office each day there are other advantages to working remotely in that it is more conducive to focussing on the job in hand and not be sidetracked by minor, unnecessary requests from others.
Obviously communications and team building factors are important. The ideal would seem to be to spend at least one day per week at the office to pick up on the elements of a project which your colleagues may be reluctant to discuss otherwise.
Working at home does requires strong self-discipline.
Member for
21 years 5 monthsRE: Working by remote
Im not sure Bernard is quite correct. While all humans might by nature be lazy, it doesnt follow that because one or more are at remote locations they arent going to get their work done.
While it is desirable to have the whole team working at the same location, my organisation regularly delivers projects on time and to budget where the team is geographically separated. Provided all members of the team are fully aware of the work to be undertaken, timescale, quality standards and so on are specified clearly and correctly there should be no problem.
Communication is important, but video-conferencing, e-mail are extremely useful for meetings and the transfer of essential documents. Provided team members do communicate nothing should "slip through the cracks" where geographical separation occurs. If they dont communicate, it isnt going to matter whether they are geographically separated or in the same room, there will be problems.
As far as political or psychological reasons for participants to hold back or sabotage efforts are concerned, processes can be put into place to reduce or eliminate the potential for this sort of activity.
In short, if you set it up properly within the project, team members working from remote locations can be just as effective as having the whole project team at the same location.
Chris Oggham
Member for
22 years 11 monthsRE: Working by remote
Humans are by nature lazy. When all participants in an endeavor are not present, it adds one more obstacle to effective communication. Little things that may be very important are more likely to "slip through the cracks" if more effort is required to communicate IMO.
Also, sometimes, there are political or psychological reasons for participants to either hold back or sabotage efforts. When all parties are present, it is more likely for these issues to be mitigated before they become real problems.
YMMV
Bernard Ertl
InterPlan Systems - ATC Professional Shutdown / Turnaround Management System