Project+Management+UG

K uk brazil uk poland uk uk finland uk hospital

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: 2.8% excluding currency rate effects) 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 2004 2004 2004 2004 2005 2005 2005 2005 2006 2006 2006 2006 2007 2007 2007 2007 2008 2008 2008 2008 56 March 2009 Skanska Corporate Presentation The largest shareholders December 31, 2008 % of capital stock % of voting power 7.3 7.8 6.9 1.1 4.0 0.4 2.4 0.2 0.2 2.1 32.4 42.1 74.5 25.5 100.0 26.8 5.3 4.6 3.0 2.7 2.4 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.4 51.1 31.6 82.7 17.3 100.0 Industrivärden AMF Pension (AMF Pension Funds included) Alecta SHB Pension Foundation Swedbank Robur Funds SEB SEB Funds SHB SHB Pension Fund AFA Insurance 10 largest shareholders in Sweden Other shareholders in Sweden Total in Sweden Shareholders abroad Total Total number of outstanding A and B shares: 418,553,072 57 March 2009 Skanska Corporate Presentation Skanska share price movement January 1, 2004−January 31, 2009 58 March 2009 Skanska Corporate Presentation Amazing projects in Skanska 59 March 2009 Skanska Corporate Presentation Meadowlands, New York 60 March 2009 Skanska Corporate Presentation United Nations, New York 61 March 2009 Skanska Corporate Presentation Älvsborg Bridge, Sweden 62 March 2009 Skanska Corporate Presentation ÅF Office, Sweden 63 March 2009 Skanska Corporate Presentation The London Hospital, U.K. Manaus, Brazil 65 March 2009 Skanska Corporate Presentation Järvastaden, Sweden 66 March 2009 Skanska Corporate Presentation MIT OpenCourseWare http://ocw.mit.edu 1.040 Project Management Spring 2009 For information about citing these materials or our Terms of Use, visit: http://ocw.mit.edu/terms. Project Organization II Project Spring 2009 Based on Lectures Given by Dr. Nathaniel Based Osgood in 2005 Osgood Fred Moavenzadeh Civil and Environmental Engineering Massachusetts Institute of Technology Project Organization Project I. Project Delivery Systems (most common) Design / Build Design Others Others Summary Summary II. Payment Schemes General points General Lumpsum Lumpsum Cost plus fixed fee/% price Cost Unit price Unit Guaranteed maximum price Guaranteed III. Award Methods General points General Negotiation Negotiation Bidding Bidding Part I Part Project Delivery Project Design-Build Design Owner Construction Function Sub contractor D/B Entity Sub contractor Contractual Relationship Communicational Relationship Internal Relationship Design Function Sub contractor How To: Design / Build How Owner Owner Develops early design (to communicate needs) Develops Hires a design/build firm that will complete both Hires design and construction This firm can be a design/build firm but also This a joint-venture firm for this specific project DB company may hire subcontractors DB Work solicited via RFP (honorarium, phased) Work Can be good for complex projects – but need Can phased design to shield parties from risk Back to the Future… Back Dominant method early in US history Dominant Recent drivers Recent Time pressure (desire to fast track) Time Shortcomings of tightly defined architect role Shortcomings Constructability issues Constructability Limited A/E oversight of construction Limited Downsizing of US corporations (outsourcing design) Downsizing Desire for single source of responsibility Desire Advantages DB Advantages Allows Fast Tracking Allows May be good for some complex projects May Close coordination within team Close Institutional knowledge build up Institutional Single source of accountability Single Owner need not mediate or be exposed to Owner designer/contractor conflicts Easier incorporation of changes caused by Easier field conditions Disadvantages DB Disadvantages Lack of fiduciary relationship with designer Lack Risk of DB sacrificing design quality to protect profit Risk design Owner must assume responsibility for quality assurance Owner Pricing not possible at the beginning Pricing Demands sophisticated owner (construction, Demands quality, oversight of submittals, negotiation,…) Must stay on top of design so don’t get surprise Must Can be bad for many complicated projects Can Very important for owner to be closely involved to Very specify important and complex aspects of design Package: Can’t pick or get rid of individual team Package: members (e.g. individual subcontractors) Design-Build Disadvantages II Design Need to make sure design goals stay foremost Need Often contractor’s interests within DB dominate Often Fewer checks and balances Fewer Problems may be hidden until late (no A/E watch) Problems May take direction that owner does not really want May Design-build firm can give high quote for changes Design Responsible for everything! Responsible If fast tracked, changes can lead to If Rework Rework Iteration Iteration Delays Delays Public Use Challenges Public Regulatory hurdles Regulatory Federal use allowed Federal Federal Acquisition Reform Act of 1996 allowed Federal Many states still do not allow Many Special permission may be granted for formal request Special Major opposition from Major Architectural lobby Architectural Unions Unions Bridge Designer/Engineer Bridge Serves as bridge between Serves Owner Owner Design-build team Design Performs preliminary design before DB team hired Performs E.g. up to 30% design E.g. Monitors development of design and construction Monitors F...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 07/25/2012 for the course ECON 111 taught by Professor King during the Spring '12 term at CSU Bakersfield.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online