Agile in Construction

Will Agile ideas and approaches fit the construction world – Definitely.

This does not mean I think that a lot of the tried and true practices we have developed need to change. Quite the contrary, the construction world have for decades been the pioneers for quality project management.

What has changed is the way in which people communicate and the culture we live in. Agile does have a lot of good properties in the personal communication. So I believe the construction world needs to embrace some aspects of Agile and the software tools that have been developed to support Agile management

 

Introduction to Agile in Construction

In this presentation, we can see that indeed many of the terms used in Agile have existed for a long time in the construction PM space. So, in many ways, we already are Agile. Thus, if you go down a path to embrace new management approaches, you first need to understand the current overlaps and also where opportunities exist.

 

Using JIRA to improve communication on construction projects

There are some great possibilities in using JIRA in the construction world. I do not believe a typical Agile approach fits into the project space; however, many of the ideas are sound and specifically the tools that have been built to facilitate Agile can be molded to fit the construction project space.

Specifically, this relates to the way we communicate and track the work we are performing or the work we are overseeing. Applications such as JIRA and DevOPS have capabilities that I feel are a perfect match for the construction world and we need to be looking how we can customize these new tools to really revolutionize the way construction projects are managed.
 

How to reduce data volume in PowerBI Maps by using WKT

In a previous blog, I showed how to load a raster tiles into PowerBI data model, in theory that should solved all my issues with doing a detailed maps in PowerBI.

unfortunately, no, even if R and Python visual support up to 150K points,  the reality is the implementation of R in the PoweBI service has a massive overhead and you can’t do anything about it, as it is literally a black box, all you can do is try to reduce the data passed to R visual and hope it works.

Actually, in my case, the visual did not even show up and I got an error message that resources are exceeded

I am in a situation where I can’t filter data because the whole point of the visual is to show all the data, at the same time, if the visual does not work in the service then there is no point in the whole exercise.

The trick is using wkt, I will simplify the geometry without losing any visual data, for example:

Instead of showing all the points, I will just group the points in the same order and colour as a line, as you can see from 14 rows of data, it is reduced to 5 rows, and the visual representation is the same, it is like sampling, but we keep the exact shape of the data.

Now in PowerBI, all we need to do is to automatically group those points together, turn out the solution was very easy using Rankx, keep in mind the wkt is dynamic for every update, I get a new geometry

After that I just added some calculated columns to create the wkt format

For a point, POINT (X Y)

For a line, STRINLINE (start_X start_Y,finish_X finish_Y)

Keep in mind you can create polygons too, but the DAX become more complex (maybe for another blog)

you can create the wkt file in QGIS very easily but as my data change daily, it was not practical

And here is the final result

The number or rows were reduced from 3528 to 218

That make a massive difference in PowerBI service, my real data is 58K rows and I can’t tell how much I was happy when finaly it worked in the service,not only that, but the total rows using wkt keep decreasing when I do more updates 🙂

There is a catch though, unfortunately as of Dec 2019, only R and Python script can render wkt geometry, there is a new custom visual by @james dales, but it is in a private beta and has some limitation on colors by category. ( icon map support color per category now)

You can download the pbix file here

I hope that in 2020, Microsoft invest more on improving the Maps offering in PowerBI , and optimize R and Python scripts on the service, I am very optimistic

with the new ICON map my use case is fully solved 🙂

Controls Accounts for Cost – Houston we have a (possible) problem

This article captures 2 issues that are related and perhaps not clearly discussed or understood (not even by me): Level of Detail, and Transactional vs Account based tracking

Many cost tools, for right or wrong, are now almost entirely Control Account based. This leads to some conceptual issues where people have been use to managing data in a more transaction way.

Additionally, when we begin to establish defined control accounts, picking the right level of detail, and how changes are managed between Controls Accounts, requires a lot of creative accounting (thoughtful process mapping through all your systems & Digital Strategy)

The below is just a primer for a potential discussion. This is a post on what it means to pick a correct level of detail and what it really means to how you manage your costs.

Transaction Management

This is my wheelhouse, the way my brain primarily works when dealing with projects. List Management. Everything is a new record.

We have contracts with detailed line items, we want to retain our budget line items, each contract line item will have various columns for Committed, Forecasts, Incurred and Paid values. We manage these detail items in this way. Below is a example of how we really manage costs (and progress and deliverable). Excel (sharepoint, or a simple flexible database) provides an ideal solution for users to manage this detail.

C01

However, the new age of cost tools want us to view projects at a more “control account” level. In the above example, I have created a control account to a WBS and Commodity code level of detail.

In the above example, we have 4 contractors working on this scope in various capacities. Although, its way more subtle then that, we actually only have 1 contract and 3 expected contracts. We have parsed our budget into what we expect to be 4 different contracts. Thus only 1 contract has a commitment, but yet we have a forecast (and budget) for all 4. Each contract will have a full detailed list of detail items that we will manage. We will items for specified growth, perhaps contingency, maybe a few site instructions. A transactional list!

Quantity Growth – new line or modify existing?

Here again is one of the conundrums of how we manage (specifically related to progress measurement. Consider a project with some concrete and steel.

If we have a change in quantity for a foundation, where do we capture the change and what does it look like in our database. Too often, we look at this and manage it using a simple excel file – which can make the process easy. However, this is a very complex issue. If we add a line item and base our progress off committed quantities, we will have to update 2 line items with %’s. However, so many options exist to capture this.

And again, if instead this item is managed at the “control account” level, all we need is the total actual quantity, or simply the overall % for the control account. When you look at the above from a control account level, you capture all the detail, but yet for % management, you can disregard all the %’s to the details and only insert a % to the control account.

Which method is right, which method fits into your cost/progress system, which approach aligned to your specifications?

In the second method above, you loose the ability to calculate a specific % for variations. So again, we have taken just a simple issue, and created a complex nightmare.  Obviously, we all solve these problems day in and day out. The issue here is again just to bring this topic to light and how the new range of cost tools may not be flexible enough to really capture what we do – nor should they! The real answer is as we all do now, some detail is managed inside excel and some abstraction ends up in the system.

Control Account Management

In the above, we have seen the importance of picking the right control account level of detail, but, we perhaps haven’t conceptualized what a controls account is in the first place. For “control account” management, we want to manage “SCOPE”. For this package of scope, we sum up all the detail coded to the same codes.

C02

When we look at scope, it is much easier to compare against our estimate which was built to this level before we had to detail with specified growth, claims, site instruction and even contractor commitment. This is why we want control account management and why so many cost tools are forcing us down this path.

Whats the Problem?

In the above example, the “control account” is meaningless. We can not “manage” anything at the control account level. The control account is only a metric.

Instead we are going to manage our contracts in isolation. Each contract will have its own specifics and likely its own approvals when we modify a forecast or a commitment.

A solution to this conundrum is to split the above into 4 control accounts (or more). However, that creates a nightmare for everyone dealing with the new cost systems where creating cost accounts, loading budgets and costs is not straight forward. Doubly so as we haven’t even begun to discuss at what level we manage our time phased data.

All the new tools also allow us to manage “detail items”. Budget again, as soon as you start to push the level of detail of management into the detail items, you may as well make the detail item its own control account.

The Problem is – Whats the right Level of Detail?

You can run this problem down rabbit holes with how we manage engineering deliverables, how we manage progress items, manhours, quantity management, etc. Here I have just presented the problem related to strictly just a cost control level. But yet the dimensions for each of the items above is multiplied by each of the additional management datasets we also track.

Picking the right level of detail that goes into our cost tools, is more of an artform than it is a science.

My view is that we need easy flexible transactional capabilities from cost systems to ease the excel hell aspects. But yet at the same time, need to understand how the transactional records join up to perhaps a more formal CTR or Control Account level of detail.

Load Raster tiles to PowerBI Data Model using R

In a previous blog, I showed how to use PowerBI to generate high quality print maps, with a caveat that the R script does not work in the Service unless all the packages are supported (the desktop use your local R install, so no limitation here)

I am a huge fan of ceramic, for me it shows the best of R philosophy, it does one thing and do it very well, you give it coordinated and it will give you back raster tiles.

I spent some time trying to figure out a workaround to make it works in the service and I found this trick.

  • Generate raster using ceramic outside PowerBI ( using Rstudio for example).
  • Save the raster object using saveRDS but using the option ASCII = TRUE, so it is a text file, notice you need to write version = 2, otherwise it will not work in the service.
  • Load the file into PowerBI using PowerQuery
  • The maximum data you can pass to R visual is 150K rows, which is not enough for my use case.
  • The trick is to group the data using concatenation, the limit is the number of rows not the number of columns :), please note the maximum number of length of a text value is 32766 
  • Merge the table for the raster with the table of data (coordinates, attribute etc), unfortunately, you can pass only one dataframe to R script, I changed to append so the visual can be sliced
  • Now you have a dataframe with the coordinates and a raster data which you pass to R Visual script
  • Unest the raster data into a dataframe, notice the dataframe holding the raster data is 1 Million rows
  • Save the dataframe to a “raster.rds”
  • Load the “raster.rds” and it is R Magic the raster is alive
  • Plot the map ( it is on the PowerBI service not the Desktop)

you can filter the status and hide the tiles if you want, as it is slow to render in the service, please use query reduction option in the filter

This workflow does works with any R object, not only Raster but any binary data can be passed to PowerBI data model.

All the codes are saved here.

I think the main take away is you can circumvent PowerBI limitation of 150,000 rows when you pass data to R or Python, but there is a trick, the resource available in the PowerBI Pro instanced are limited and not documentation, so your mileage may vary , but it is worth the try

now, you may ask, why bother with this tedious, slow visual, the answer is very easy, in some cases you want to control the exact look of a map, and R give you just that, you can show multiple layers, text, it support more than 30 K point in a map, it is worth the pain

edit : I just noticed that PowerBI cache the visual output , if you do the exact selection again, the visual show instantly !!!