21 March 2016

How to say little in 34 slides #nlpoli

  • Consultants have consistently reported that the Muskrat Falls project is well-managed and well-led.
  • Despite that independent analysis, MFP has been dogged by significant cost over-runs, significant problems with performance on meeting project timelines, and chronic problems with communications/public disclosure.
  • Review of Muskrat Falls project by a company called Independent Project Analysis.
  • Consists of 34 slides
  • Majority of slides (20) contain background information on project and contractor or bland statements of fact.
  • No details on research specific to this assessment beyond reference to interviews.
  • Remainder of slides (14) provide no evidence to support positive statements or indicate areas of concern...
  • Example:
    • “LCP has the following characteristics that are comparable to those of successful megaprojects moving forward…”
  • Implicit unanswered questions remain. 
    • Question: What was the before/after assessment that led to the “September re-baseline”?
  • In other words, did MFP have the characteristics of successful megaprojects before what IPA calls the “September re-baseline” or are those the result of a significant project re-jig?
  • Slides seem to only discuss situation since September“moving forward” with no indication of substantive knowledge of situation before September 2015.
  • This is important because other consultants told us repeatedly this was a solidly managed project before the “September re-baseline”. 
  • MFP supporters have record of presenting information that is inaccurate/incomplete.
  • Examples:
  • Solidly managed projects primed for success don’t usually have to reset the baseline halfway through.
    • Question:  Does it have any characteristics of unsuccessful megaprojects?
  • Unexplained hints of internal project management problems (comms often misidentified/mistakenly blamed for management problems):
    • LCP organization comprises more levels than typically observed for similar projects, suggesting additional communication efforts required…
    • “Organization staffing analysis indicates that MFG would benefit from additional construction management…
    • “LCP lower level management comments suggest an increased management field presence will be beneficial…”
  • Red Flag (Slide 32 – Recommendations,  first bullet):
    • “All megaprojects have to be vigilant and exercise due diligence in reacting to capital productivity challenges.”
  • On one hand a penetrating insight into the obvious.
  • On other hand may refer to specific problems with this project with “capital productivity challenges”.
  • Sudden appearance of jargon  unrelated to rest of presentation = Big Red Flag
  • Unexplained Jargon =  Enormous Red Flag
  • Could be referring to significant cost over-runs on project to date coupled with significant problems that led to “September re-baseline.”
  • Could be something else.
  • ???  What does it mean
  • Conclusion:
    • Consultants have consistently reported that the Muskrat Falls project is well-managed and well-led.
    • Despite that independent analysis, MFP has been dogged by significant cost over-runs, significant problems with performance on meeting project timelines, and chronic problems with communications/public disclosure.
    • Growing gap between claims in favour of project and observable experience coupled with proponents’ record of incomplete/inaccurate statements undermines public confidence in project and its proponents (Nalcor and government).
-srbp-