Project Definition Rating Index (PDRI)
Revisited
G. Edward Gibson, Jr., Ph.D., P.E.
Professor, Department of Civil Engineering
The University of Texas at Austin
Agenda
• What is PDRI?
• How broadly used by CII members?
• How organizations using PDRI?
• What is the value of using PDRI?
• How to use PDRI?
• Lessons learned since the tool’s introduction?
What Is PDRI?
PDRI – The Definition
• An Acronym
– Project Definition Rating Index
• An Index
– Score along a continuum representing the level
of scope definition
• A Risk Management Tool
– Identifies and measures risks related to project
scope definition
PDRI – History
Born on date
PDRI Industrial: 1996
PDRI Buildings: 1999
Why Developed?
PDRI – Composition
Industrial
Buildings
Sections:
3
3
Categories:
15
11
Elements:
70
64
70-1000
70-1000
Score:
SECTION I - BASIS OF PROJECT DECISION
Definition Level
CATEGORY
0
1
Element
A. MANUFACTURING OBJECTIVES CRITERIA (Maximum Score = 45)
A1. Reliability Philosophy
A2. Maintenance Philosophy
A3. Operating Philosophy
2
3
4
5
0
0
0
1
1
1
5
9
14
3
5
7
4
7
12
CATEGORY A TOTAL
20
9
16
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
1
1
2
2
1
1
11
22
33
5
10
16
5
9
14
3
6
9
11
21
33
3
6
10
2
3
5
2
5
7
CATEGORY B TOTAL
56
26
23
16
55
17
8
12
10
21
39
8
17
28
CATEGORY C TOTAL
54
40
Score
B. BUSINESS OBJECTIVES (Maximum Score = 213)
B1.
B2.
B3.
B4.
B5.
B6.
B7.
B8.
Products
Market Strategy
Project Strategy
Affordability/Feasibility
Capacities
Future Expansion Considerations
Expected Project Life Cycle
Social Issues
C. BASIC DATA RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT (Maximum Score = 94)
C1. Technology
C2. Processes
0
0
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
3
2
2
1
2
D. PROJECT SCOPE (Maximum Score = 120)
D1.
D2.
D3.
D4.
D5.
D6.
Project Objectives Statement
Project Design Criteria
Site Characteristics Available vs. Required
Dismantling and Demolition Requirements
Lead/Discipline Scope of Work
Project Schedule
6
11
16
5
4
8
7
12
10
25
22
29
15
13
16
CATEGORY D TOTAL
E. VALUE ENGINEERING (Maximum Score = 27)
E1. Process Simplification
E2. Design & Material Alternatives Considered/Rejected
E3. Design for Constructability Analysis
Section I Maximum Score = 499
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
5
8
CATEGORY E TOTAL
8
7
12
SECTION I TOTAL
Definition Levels
0 = Not Applicable
1 = Complete Definition
2 = Minor Deficiencies
3 = Some Deficiencies
4 = Major Deficiencies
5 = Incomplete or Poor Definition
PDRI Element Descriptions
(Example)
A1. Reliability Philosophy
A list of the general design principles to be considered to achieve dependable
operating performance from the unit. Evaluation criteria should include:
 Justification of spare equipment
 Control, alarm, and safety systems redundancy
 Extent of providing surge and intermediate storage capacity to permit
independent shutdown of portions of the plant
 Mechanical / structural integrity of components (metallurgy, seals,
types of couplings, bearing selection, etc.)
SECTION I - BASIS OF PROJECT DECISION
Definition Level
CATEGORY
0
1
Element
A. MANUFACTURING OBJECTIVES CRITERIA (Maximum Score = 45)
A1. Reliability Philosophy
A2. Maintenance Philosophy
A3. Operating Philosophy
2
3
4
5
0
0
0
1
1
1
5
9
14
3
5
7
4
7
12
CATEGORY A TOTAL
20
9
16
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
1
1
2
2
1
1
11
22
33
5
10
16
5
9
14
3
6
9
11
21
33
3
6
10
2
3
5
2
5
7
CATEGORY B TOTAL
56
26
23
16
55
17
8
12
10
21
39
8
17
28
CATEGORY C TOTAL
54
40
Score
B. BUSINESS OBJECTIVES (Maximum Score = 213)
B1.
B2.
B3.
B4.
B5.
B6.
B7.
B8.
Products
Market Strategy
Project Strategy
Affordability/Feasibility
Capacities
Future Expansion Considerations
Expected Project Life Cycle
Social Issues
C. BASIC DATA RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT (Maximum Score = 94)
C1. Technology
C2. Processes
0
0
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
3
2
2
1
2
D. PROJECT SCOPE (Maximum Score = 120)
D1.
D2.
D3.
D4.
D5.
D6.
Project Objectives Statement
Project Design Criteria
Site Characteristics Available vs. Required
Dismantling and Demolition Requirements
Lead/Discipline Scope of Work
Project Schedule
6
11
16
5
4
8
7
12
10
25
22
29
15
13
16
CATEGORY D TOTAL
E. VALUE ENGINEERING (Maximum Score = 27)
E1. Process Simplification
E2. Design & Material Alternatives Considered/Rejected
E3. Design for Constructability Analysis
Section I Maximum Score = 499
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
5
8
CATEGORY E TOTAL
8
7
12
SECTION I TOTAL
Definition Levels
0 = Not Applicable
1 = Complete Definition
2 = Minor Deficiencies
3 = Some Deficiencies
4 = Major Deficiencies
5 = Incomplete or Poor Definition
How Broadly Used?
PDRI Usage Among CII Members
PDRI USAGE
PDRI TYPE
Not
Applicable
(3)
Both
(15)
Not Used
(24)
Industrial Only
(22)
Used
(43)
Building Only
(6)
N = 70
How Being Used?
Usage
• As a checklist in early project development (81%)
• As a “gate” check before moving to the next project
phase (72%)
• In conjunction with other front end planning
measurement methods (72%)
• As a means of measuring or benchmarking front-end
planning process performance (70%)
• More than once on most projects (42%)
Usage
(continued)
• Others:
– As an audit tool (42%)
– In a modified form for small or unusual projects
(33%)
– To help capture lessons-learned (28%)
– With the help of an outside facilitator (19%)
The Value
Understanding PDRI Scores
1000 Points
0 Points
LOWER IS BETTER!!
What does a score mean?
• A continuum
• Relative to timing
• Only as valid as effort/seriousness
• Accuracy (the real score) can be improved
with facilitation
• Perhaps is not the most important output
of the assessment
Comparison of Projects with PDRI
Above and Below 200 — Industrial Projects
PDRI Score
Performance
< 200
> 200
Cost
4% below budget
6% over budget
Schedule
3% behind of schedule
11% behind schedule
Change Orders
6% of budget
8% of budget
(N=62)
(N=44)
PDRI – The Results
EXAMPLE:
$55 Million Industrial Project, 24-Month Schedule
< 200
Cost
> 200
$53 million
$58 million
Schedule 25 months
27 months
Comparison of Projects with PDRI
Above and Below 200 — Building Projects
PDRI Score
Performance
< 200
> 200
Cost
1% over budget
10% over budget
Schedule
On schedule
21% behind schedule
Change Orders
7% of budget
11% of budget
(N=18)
(N=74)
How to Use
Assessing a Project
• What it SHOULDN’T BE
Performed
in a
vacuum
Time Needed for Assessing a Project
• Two-and-a-half to four hours initially
• Less later
Observations
• Official sanctioning of activity
• Part of process
• Small cadre of facilitators
• Training
• Does not plan
• Risk mitigation process
Summary
Benefits of PDRI to Owners
• Well planned projects
• Better team alignment and communication
• Improved risk assessment
• Ability to make “tradeoff” decisions
• Can be used in developing
a portfolio
Benefits of PDRI
to Designers and Contractors
• Ability to measure scope
• Avenue to communicate
• Reconcile differences
• Standardized scope package
• Monitor progress
• Minimize design rework
In Summary
• PDRI works!
• PDRI is not as easy as it appears
• “Score” is good, process of getting
there is better
PDRI Publications
PDRI Industrial Projects
CII Implementation Resource 113-2
PDRI Building Projects
CII Implementation Resource 155-2
http://construction-institute.org/pdri/
Implementation Session
Participants
Steve Campbell NASA
John Fish
Ford, Bacon, and Davis
Edd Gibson
UT Austin
Bob Herrington
Jacobs
Jim Nelson
3M
Javid Talib
Black and Veatch
Come Join Us!
• Location: Georgia B
• Times:
Wednesday 10:45-11:45 am
1:00-2:00 pm