IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orinte/v42y2012i1p17-32.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

System Dynamics Transforms Fluor Project and Change Management

Author

Listed:
  • Edward Godlewski

    (Fluor Enterprises Inc., Irvine, California 92618)

  • Gregory Lee

    (Kenneth Cooper Associates LLC, Huntington Beach, California 92649)

  • Kenneth Cooper

    (Kenneth Cooper Associates LLC, Milford, New Hampshire 03055)

Abstract

Fluor Corporation designs and builds many of the world's most complex projects and serves clients in many industries across six continents. On our most complex projects, we have implemented a system dynamics model-based system that has improved our project management, transformed our change management, and brought large quantified business benefits to us and our clients. The model can be rapidly set up and tailored to each major engineering and construction project. We use it to foresee the future cost and schedule impacts of project changes, and most important, to test ways to avoid the impacts. Since 2005, Fluor has used the system on over 100 projects and has trained hundreds of project managers and planners in its ongoing internal use. Quantitative business benefits exceed $800 million to date for Fluor and our clients. It has also transformed the mindset of our managers away from the industry's typical retrospective view, in which disputes could become the channel for resolving cost responsibility, and replaced it with a proactive approach, in which we work with our clients to find, in advance, ways to mitigate impacts and reduce costs—a win-win situation for Fluor and our clients.

Suggested Citation

  • Edward Godlewski & Gregory Lee & Kenneth Cooper, 2012. "System Dynamics Transforms Fluor Project and Change Management," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 42(1), pages 17-32, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:orinte:v:42:y:2012:i:1:p:17-32
    DOI: 10.1287/inte.1110.0595
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/inte.1110.0595
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/inte.1110.0595?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kenneth G. Cooper, 1980. "Naval Ship Production: A Claim Settled and a Framework Built," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 10(6), pages 20-36, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Raafat Mahmoud Zaini & Oleg V. Pavlov & Khalid Saeed & Michael J. Radzicki & Allen H. Hoffman & Kristen R. Tichenor, 2017. "Let's Talk Change in a University: A Simple Model for Addressing a Complex Agenda," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(3), pages 250-266, May.
    2. Yasaman Jalili & David N. Ford, 2016. "Quantifying the impacts of rework, schedule pressure, and ripple effect loops on project schedule performance," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 32(1), pages 82-96, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. George P. Richardson, 2014. ""Model" teaching III: Examples for the later stages," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 30(4), pages 291-299, October.
    2. Williams, Terry, 1999. "Towards realism in network simulation," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 305-314, June.
    3. Qian, Yanjun & Xie, Min & Goh, Thong Ngee & Lin, Jun, 2010. "Optimal testing strategies in overlapped design process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 206(1), pages 131-143, October.
    4. Repenning, Nelson P. (Nelson Peter), 1998. "The transition problem in product development," Working papers WP 4036-98., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    5. Ford, David N. & Sterman, John., 1997. "Dynamic modeling of product development processes," Working papers WP 3943-97., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    6. T Williams, 2003. "Learning from projects," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 54(5), pages 443-451, May.
    7. Liu, Shiyong & Triantis, Konstantinos P. & Sarangi, Sudipta, 2010. "A framework for evaluating the dynamic impacts of a congestion pricing policy for a transportation socioeconomic system," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 44(8), pages 596-608, October.
    8. Williams, Terry & Ackermann, Fran & Eden, Colin, 2003. "Structuring a delay and disruption claim: An application of cause-mapping and system dynamics," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 148(1), pages 192-204, July.
    9. S Howick & C Eden, 2004. "On the nature of discontinuities in system dynamics modelling of disrupted projects," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 55(6), pages 598-605, June.
    10. S Howick, 2003. "Using system dynamics to analyse disruption and delay in complex projects for litigation: can the modelling purposes be met?," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 54(3), pages 222-229, March.
    11. Howick, Susan, 2005. "Using system dynamics models with litigation audiences," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 162(1), pages 239-250, April.
    12. Joglekar, Nitin R. & Ford, David N., 2005. "Product development resource allocation with foresight," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 160(1), pages 72-87, January.
    13. Yasaman Jalili & David N. Ford, 2016. "Quantifying the impacts of rework, schedule pressure, and ripple effect loops on project schedule performance," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 32(1), pages 82-96, January.
    14. Thomas Walworth & Mike Yearworth & Laura Shrieves & Hillary Sillitto, 2016. "Estimating Project Performance through a System Dynamics Learning Model," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(4), pages 334-350, July.
    15. Lin, Jun & Chai, Kah Hin & Wong, Yoke San & Brombacher, Aarnout C., 2008. "A dynamic model for managing overlapped iterative product development," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 185(1), pages 378-392, February.
    16. Daniel Kasperek & Daniel Schenk & Matthias Kreimeyer & Maik Maurer & Udo Lindemann, 2016. "Structure‐Based System Dynamics Analysis of Engineering Design Processes," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(3), pages 278-298, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:orinte:v:42:y:2012:i:1:p:17-32. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.