Introduction
In the past feasibility studies for projects have been developed on an ad hoc basis because a standardised approach has never really been developed. As a result various large organisations like the international oil companies and the British Airports Authority have developed their own in-house systems to improve the process.
The old unstructured approach has been successful on many projects in the past but the complexity of the processes involved in a large project inevitably results in a quite high risk of failure when the project either runs very late or is wildly over budget or even worse just does not work.
If you have already downloaded the Ebook you will already have the knowledge of how to improve upon the old ways!
The investment life-cycle
The investment life-cycle was normally considered to consist of 6 separate stages of development that can overlap. These are:
Opportunity identification
Someone has a bright idea, and an initial assessment is made. If the opportunity stands up during an initial analysis than funds are commited for further investigation. It is possible that a pre-feasibility study may be necessary before further funds can be committed. This is conventionally a very ad-hoc process and the lack of control duringn this stage is often a prime cause of project failure.
Appraisal
The appraisal stage should include a comprehensive feasibility study that clearly identifies all the development options and the one that is the most attractive
The appraisal will probably include:
- Definition of the project objective and scope
- Definition of the project structure
- Development of the business case
- Identification of the funding options
- Risk analysis
- The feasibility study and investigations
At the end of this stage an interim go / no-go decision will need to be made.
Investment planning
This stage may include:
- Putting the funds in place
- Undertaking the concept design
- Obtaing all the consents and licenses
- Preparation of a project plan
- Preparation of a risk mitigation plan
At the end of this stage a final go / no-go decision will have to be made.
Asset creation
This stage will include:
The preparation of a detailed construction schedule
-
Detailed design
-
Construction
-
Commissioning
Operation
This involves operating and maintaining the asset to provided the benefits that were defined in Item 1 of the Appraisal stage.
Close-down
The end of the investment life-cycle that may be determined by:
- Obsolescence
- End of the licence or consent
- Uneconomic operation
Summary
The investment life-cycle stages are summarised in the following table:
| Stage |
Processes |
Decision parameters |
| Opportunity identification |
Identify business need
Define the opportunity
Undertake initial assessment
Decision to proceed |
Capital cost estimate (+/- 30%)
Operating cost estimate
Cash flows
Preliminary risk review |
| Appraisal |
Define objectives, scope and business requirement
Define project structure and strategy
Develop business case
Identify source of funds and cost
Carry out studies
Decision to proceed |
Capital cost estimates (+ / - 15%)
Operating cost estimate
Cash flows
Identify the cost of the planning phase
Full risk review |
| Investment planning |
Put funds in place
Obtain all consents and licences
Undertake the concept design
Preparation of the project plan
Final decision to proceed
Place any enabling contracts that are required |
Cost of finance
Capital cost estimates (+ / - 10%)
Operating cost estimate
Cash flows
Identify the total cost of the asset creation phase
Risk review
|
| Asset creation |
Put project team in place
Detailed design
Place contracts
Construct
Commission and handover
Train operators and prepare for operation |
Scope
Quality
Schedule
Capital Cost
Risk management |
| Operation |
Operate
Take benefits
Maintain |
Operating Cost
Maintenance cost
Revenue
Other benfits |
| Close-down |
Shutdown
Sale or disposal |
Shutdown costs
Staff redundancy cost
disposal cost / income |
Conclusion
It is apparent that the above process can become so complex on many projects that an ad-hoc approach to project development will result in a high risk that either the project just does not work or overruns on time and / or cost.
It is also the case that most projects will require the input of specialist skills that are not available from the company or organisation that identified the opportunity. Consultants and other contractors may then required and it then becomes very difficult to decide who does what and to ensure that all the best development options are thoroughly explored and compared with each other.
It is also the case that consultants are often asked to undertake the feasibility studies because they have the necessary skills. Objectivity can then easily be lost because the consultants will often have a vested interest in the adoption of one or more of the alternatives i.e. more work and more fees!
However the biggest danger in this approach is that the stages begin to overlap and this can result in the Asset Creation stage starting before all the neccessary planning and approvals are in place. This results in late changes and consequent delays and cost overruns.
And what drives the whole process?
The most important driver in the conventional project development process is that the cost and duration of the next stage of project development is known before funds are committed to it.
This can be extraordinairly difficult for the inexperienced project manager and so it is common for cost and duration overruns to occur during the Appraisal, Investment Planning and Asset Creation stages.
Click on the link on the right Cost accuracy graph for a useful aid in estimating these costs.
|