What is the Last Planner System, and How can it be adopted for infrastructure projects
Introduction to the Last Planner System (LPS) The Last Planner System (LPS) is a project management approach primarily invented by Glenn Ballard, Greg Howell and Laurie Koskela. Each of them contributed to the development of the Last Planner Techniques/system (LPT/LPS) at a certain point of time. The Last Planner System (LPS) is designed to establish…
Introduction to the Last Planner System (LPS)
The Last Planner System (LPS) is a project management approach primarily invented by Glenn Ballard, Greg Howell and Laurie Koskela. Each of them contributed to the development of the Last Planner Techniques/system (LPT/LPS) at a certain point of time. The Last Planner System (LPS) is designed to establish a consistent and predictable workflow among multiple stakeholders, ensuring of getting dependable outcomes. LPS facilitates the early identification and resolution of potential obstacles to prevent them from impeding the project’s progress.
LPS focused on improving the planning process in the construction industry. It focuses on improving project planning and execution through collaboration, short-term planning, and continuous improvement.
LPS is based on lean principles derived from manufacturing and production processes.
Components of the Last Planner System (LPS)
The key components of LPS include:
- Master Schedule: This high-level project schedule outlines major milestones and target completion dates, typically set by project managers or owners.
- Pull Planning: In this step, the project is broken down into phases or work packages.
- Look-Ahead Planning: Teams create short-term assignments, typically covering a week or a few weeks at a time.
- Weekly Work Planning: At the start of each week, teams review the look-ahead plan and commit to completing the planned work for that week. In addition, Invisitage the reasons behind why the previous week plan is not completed and how realistic it was.
- Daily Huddles: Teams hold daily huddles or stand-up meetings to discuss progress, address any problems, and make real-time adjustments to the plan.
- Performance Metrics: The Last Planner System uses key performance metrics to track progress, including Percent Plan Complete (PPC).
- Continuous Improvement: The real-time adjustment to the plan and changing the direction as needed is an integral part of LPS. The system emphasizes learning from the execution of the plan and using that knowledge to improve future planning and execution.
What is The difference between the last planner and normal planning & scheduling?
The Last Planner System (LPS) and conventional planning and scheduling methods differ significantly in their approach to managing and executing projects. Here are the key differences between the two:
- Collaboration vs. Top-Down Planning:
- LPS: LPS promotes collaboration among project teams and stakeholders. It involves those responsible for the work in the planning and decision-making process.
- Normal Planning & Scheduling: Traditional planning tends to be top-down, with project managers or schedulers creating plans with little direct input from the teams executing the work. Collaboration may be limited by contractual constraints or deadlines that might not be reasonable.
- Work Package Focus vs. Detailed Scheduling:
- LPS: LPS breaks the project into phases and emphasizes detailed planning for these specific phases. It prioritizes short-term planning over long term.
- Normal Planning & Scheduling: Traditional scheduling often involves detailed scheduling for the entire project, focusing on sequencing all tasks and activities. It may not always provide the level of detail needed for effective execution.
- Pull Planning vs. Push Scheduling:
- LPS: LPS follows a “pull” approach, where work is planned based on the readiness of the preceding tasks. Teams commit to tasks they are confident they can complete, and the plan is adjusted based on real-time progress and constraints.
- Normal Planning & Scheduling: Traditional scheduling tends to follow a “push” approach, where tasks are assigned based on the schedule, and teams are expected to adhere to predefined deadlines even if unforeseen challenges arise.
- Short-Term vs. Long-Term Focus:
- LPS: LPS emphasizes short-term planning, typically covering a week or a few weeks at a time. It allows for more adaptability and responsiveness to changing conditions.
- Normal Planning & Scheduling: Traditional scheduling often focuses on the entire project duration, making it less adaptable to changes or unexpected issues that may arise during execution.
- Ownership and Accountability:
- LPS: LPS fosters a sense of ownership and accountability among the teams responsible for executing the work. Teams commit to completing tasks and are collectively responsible for problem-solving.
- Normal Planning & Scheduling: Traditional planning may not always clearly define ownership and accountability for specific tasks, leading to potential finger-pointing when issues arise.
Benefits of LPS for Infrastructure Projects
The Last Planner System is designed to increase collaboration among project teams, improve communication, reduce waste, and enhance overall project efficiency. By involving those responsible for the work in the planning and decision-making process it aims to create a more reliable and efficient construction process, ultimately leading to higher-quality projects and reduced delays.
This makes LPS ideally suited for infrastructure projects, which typically require complex coordination between multiple stakeholders and rely on long-term planning. Adopting LPS for infrastructure projects could lead to improved collaboration, better communication, reduced delays and disruptions, and, ultimately, higher-quality projects.
Conclusion
In summary, the Last Planner System represents a more collaborative, adaptive, and team-centric approach to project planning and execution, with a strong emphasis on short-term planning, continuous improvement, and active involvement of those doing the work.