You’re offline. This is a read only version of the page.
Skip to main content
Toggle navigation
Home
Search
Sign in
Lean Tracker Database
Case Studies
Best Practices
Collaborative Planning
Collaborative Planning Benefits
Visual Performance Management
Visual Performance Management Benefits
View Project Details
Back to Lean Tracker
Project Summary
Lean Project Name
*
*
Unique ID
*
Lean Project Description
*
*
Lean Project Summary
*
The Kier A585 project team adopted a Lean approach by engaging utility companies early at the Preliminary Design stage. This enabled detailed surveys and consideration of alternative solutions, such as local protection, to retain existing utilities and avoid major diversions. Accurate early data allowed design flexibility, reducing costs, programme delays, and scheme constraints. The team used Value Stream Mapping, Root Cause Analysis, and collaborative planning to identify inefficiencies and manage daily production, improving project coordination and stakeholder engagement. Lessons learnt were shared widely, promoting early engagement and data-driven decisions. These process changes enhanced efficiency, reduced disruption, and created a more adaptable and cost-effective project delivery.
Lean Project Benefits Summary
*
The A585 scheme Drainage Runs Review improvement project delivered extensive benefits by employing a Lean approach and early utility engagement. Key achievements included £2,500,580 in cost savings and reduced programme duration through efficient planning and early surveys. Enhanced design flexibility allowed the avoidance of unnecessary utility diversions, lowering risks and constraints on the scheme. Daily production monitoring, collaborative planning, and lesson sharing across the business boosted operational efficiency and improved stakeholder coordination. The Lean approach provided better control over project timelines and resource allocation, lowered site running costs, and mitigated environmental impact, setting a benchmark for future projects in cost-effective and sustainable delivery.
Roads Period Efficiency Reported
RP1 2015-2020
RP2 2020-2025
RP3 2025-2030
N/A
Efficiency Value Assured
*
£
Efficiency Register ID
Project Cover Image
Choose File
---
Lean Construction Development Programme (LCDP) Project
Lean Construction Development Programme (LCDP) Project
No
Lean Construction Development Programme (LCDP) Project
Yes
Supplier
*
Contact Email
*
*
*
Stakeholders involved in project
*
Stakeholders Involved - Other
*
Problem Solving Strategy (DMAICT)
Define
*
Engagement with utility companies has traditionally occurred late in the project timeline, making it difficult to adapt designs or retain existing utilities in situ. This often led to unnecessary diversions and removals, resulting in increased costs, longer programme durations, and greater disruption. Delayed involvement limited opportunities for detailed surveys and alternative design solutions, which could have reduced constraints on the wider scheme. By moving this engagement to the Preliminary Design stage (PCF Stage 3), rather than the later Construction Preparation stage (PCF Stage 5), there is greater opportunity for thorough surveys and consideration of alternative solutions. This Lean approach aims to provide better information for adapting designs, potentially retaining existing utilities in situ, reducing costs and delays, and easing constraints on the wider scheme designs.
Measure
*
Historically, Statutory Undertaker (SU) works such as diversions and outages would have been planned, designed, and undertaken at Project Control Framework (PCF) Stage 5 – Construction Preparation. The established practice of considering the requirement for Statutory Undertaker works at this relatively late construction preparation stage has often meant that initial assumptions regarding the need to divert or remove utilities are fully integrated into the wider scheme design. This may result from limited opportunity to carry out more detailed surveys to accurately determine the position and condition of utilities and their interaction with the intended works.
Analyse
*
Lean tools such as Value Stream Mapping and Root Cause Analysis were applied to identify inefficiencies and areas for improvement. By mapping the process, it became clear that late-stage engagement with utilities reduces opportunities to consider alternative design options, resulting in unnecessary diversions and increased costs. Once the wider scheme design is well progressed, there is typically less perceived benefit in examining alternative solutions. Ordinarily, a more cautious approach would be adopted during the initial assessment of the works’ impact on existing utilities, making provision for diversion or removal in most cases where there is a reasonable possibility of impact by the works. Beyond the actual diversion or removal activities, a further implication is the constraints imposed on the wider scheme design to accommodate utilities diversions.
Improve
*
The revised approach involves engaging utility companies earlier in the project timeline, at the Preliminary Design stage (PCF Stage 3). This enables detailed surveys and consideration of alternative solutions, such as local protection measures, to retain utilities in situ and shield them from the A585 Windy Harbour scheme—providing a far less intensive solution. By obtaining accurate data early on, the project team was able to adapt designs more flexibly, reduce costs, avoid delays, and ease design constraints. This proactive approach enhances overall project efficiency and reduces disruption.
Control
*
Improvements were sustained by continuously monitoring and recording daily production data, allowing for early detection of issues and tracking of performance trends. Collaborative planning reduced the risk of clashes and promoted clear communication. Key actions included regular progress reviews, involving all stakeholders in planning sessions, and updating method statements based on real-time findings. Emphasis was placed on maintaining clear records and adapting operations as necessary.
Transfer
*
The project highlighted the value of early stakeholder engagement, real-time monitoring, and collaborative planning in reducing delays, costs, and clashes. Lessons learnt demonstrated that involving all parties from the outset and sharing clear data improved decision-making and outcomes. For future projects, it is advisable to commence detailed surveys and engage with utilities at an early stage, utilise Lean collaborative planning, and adopt continuous progress tracking. This Lean improvement has been shared with the wider group through a lessons learnt document.
What Lean Tools & Methodologies were used for your Lean Project?
If Other, please specify
*
Other Project Benefits
Meeting the needs of all users
Meeting the needs of all users - Other
*
Improving safety, health & wellbeing for all
Improving safety, health & wellbeing for all-Other
*
Delivering better environmental outcomes
Delivering better environmental outcomes - Other
*
Sustain a well-maintained and resilient network
Sustain well-maintained & resilient network- Other
*
Providing fast and reliable journeys
Providing fast and reliable journeys - Other
*
Achieve efficient delivery
Achieve efficient delivery - Other
*
Project Detail
National Highways Directorates involved in project
*
Division
Scheme Name
*
Scheme PIN
*
Was a Departure Required?
Was a Departure Required?
No
Was a Departure Required?
Yes
DAS Reference
*
How would you categorise your Lean project?
Uploaded Files
There are no notes to display.
You don't have permissions to view notes.
Error completing request.
Loading...
Loading...
