A construction project: The Millau Viaduct

Laure H.

Commandez une rédaction : Étude de cas en Management & organisation sur mesure

Devis en ligne gratuit

Étude de cas Format .doc

A construction project: The Millau Viaduct

Télécharger

Lire un extrait

Lecture
Résumé
Sommaire
Extraits

Résumé du document

The project of a viaduct over the Tarn Valley and the city of Millau in Southern France was a major issue for many years among the French population and the Ministry of Transport. It aimed at providing a solution for the severe traffic jam that occurred every summer, and its by-product, especially pollution and hazard inside the town of Millau. This project was a real challenge since the bridge's construction was a huge undertaking facing many technical problems and it proved to be a major construction innovation. The analysis of this project will be focused on three major areas: uncertainty management in the first part, stakeholders' management in the second part and organizational structure in the third part.
In the first part, we find that Millau's project faces a specific environment and the specific uncertainties arising from it: time and costs as well as stakeholders' expectations. Besides, threats are found to be more emphasized than opportunities, and dealing with both at the same time can help Eiffage, especially regarding reaction and pressure of local population, also referred to as residents. Even though the global level of uncertainty is rather low, the project team should work more on its relationship with the major actors involved.

Sommaire

Summary
Introduction
Presentation of the project
1. Project background: motivations for its implementation
2. Millau viaduct: A challenge
3. The Pre-Construction and Planning Stage
4. Construction stage
5. Completion of the project
6. Resources needed and costs
7. Result: A great success
Environmental analysis: Uncertainty management
1. Risk and uncertainty: A broad scope of definitions
2. Key areas of uncertainty
3. Managing uncertainty
Project's stakeholders: Identification and analysis
1. The power/interest matrix
2. Analysis of the project's stakeholders
3. Managing stakeholders
Project organization: Ideal structure for the project
1. External structure
2. Internal structure
3. Project culture
4. Millau Viaduct Program as an organization: The bureaucratic project
Conclusion
Appendix
References

Accédez gratuitement au plan de ce document en vous connectant.

Extraits

[...] John 1996: 50). Through demonstrations or blockades, the activist can cause delay in the construction with one purpose: to disrupt the project. This would entail huge costs because of the projects large scale, and the interdependence between the different parts of the project (McElroy and Mills 2000); it also gives activists a high degree of power but no legitimate claims. That the actions can happen any time calls for immediate attention. This is what Mitchell et al. (1997) classifies as dangerous stakeholders. [...]

[...] But recent studies have adopted a broader view and included both negative and positive aspects (Hillson 2001:235; Ward and Chapman 2003:98). For instance PMBOK (Project Management Body of Knowledge) defines project risk as uncertain event or condition that, if occurs, has a positive or negative effect on at least one project objective, such as time, cost, scope, or quality” (Perminova et al : 2). Uncertainty has also been referred to as an “overarching term with two varieties” (Hillson 2001:235): negative effects and positive effects. [...]

[...] Hopefully, this did not happen in Millau's case. Finally, in the termination stage, uncertainties arise from the outcome and the follow-up: companies cannot know for sure if their project is going to be a success; but they should put effort in learning and experience so that the knowledge acquired on the project is analyzed and passed on for future projects. Millau's viaduct was raising a lot of expectations but it might not have satisfied some of the stakeholders. For instance, it could have succeeded at fulfilling drivers' needs, but environmentalists might have found it destroyed the equilibrium of the environment; local people might have complained that tourists did not go through the city of Millau anymore etc. [...]

[...] This integration is essential to carry out such a great scope project and is not provided by the functional organization. Furthermore, the project manager has full authority over both the project and its human resources making the organization more efficient and avoiding all kind of tensions between the project manager and the functional manager as it often happens in matrix organization (Gray and Larson 2006: 68). Besides, concerning the limited technical expertise which is feared as part of this structure, Eiffage Group is likely to overcome this as it assigned people from all their subsidiaries and also planned to create a team specifically dedicated to environmental protection. [...]

[...] If it allows a good use of specialists, it requires a high coordination among working groups as well. The egoless team structure is close to a completely flat organization with no boss and a stress on collaborative work. If this form can benefit from strong commitment of the participants, it can generate conflicts because of absence of authority. Ultimately, in the surgical team structure, one individual is given total responsibility. However, the final result depends almost exclusively on the leader's skills and it is sometimes very difficult to find the right leader. [...]

doc