International Journal of Project ManagementVol. 15, No. 4, pp.

205-209, 1997
'ergamon © 1997 Elsevier Science Ltd and IPMA. All rights reserved
Printed in Great Britain
0263-7863/97 $17.00 + 0.00

PII: S0263-7863(96)00066-X

The lean approach to project

management

Eric Gabriel
Gabriel Project Consultants, Sandhurst, Berkshire, UK

The early work in project management introduced project-oriented systems and methodologies,
previously lacking in the project direct participants. The emphasis inevitably was on centralised
project teams owning the systems. The paper illustrates through case studies the developed
concept of lean project management, which recognises that the system and philosophy is now
better understood by participants, who themselves provide and contribute to the project control
mechanisms. The project manager becomes an individual client-based leader of the project
team, the source of decision making and the conduit for communication. The approach has been
successful on complex public arts buildings over 10 years and could be of general application
in a wide range of project management and management by project environments. © 1997
Elsevier Science Ltd and IPMA
Keywords: Lean project management, client involvement, project team, arts projects, leadership

The dilemma is familiar in all forms of management of The Sainsbury Wing

centralising or decentralising, more or less management.
Project management is subject to the same problems. From
its inception as a project manager with a small project team,
it has moved to task forces numbering up to 50, duplicated
project management teams with client/contractor working
side-by-side, project management services providers, co-
ordinators and other variations.
The author's earlier experience included work on North
Sea oil and nuclear power industries, where project teams
tended to be large. By contrast, his experience in the
building industry as client project manager, first for the
Sainsbury Wing of the National Gallery (1987-1990), for
the Henry Moore Institute in Leeds, and for the New
Glyndebourne Opera House (1991-1994), was mainly as a
one-man band: the lean approach to project management,
which resulted in great project success, meeting all the
quality, time and cost criteria for the clients concerned, as
well as giving professional satisfaction and profitable work
for the design and construction teams.
This paper describes the principles of lean project
management and how to use them.
The case studies
In describing the lean approach, both the Sainsbury Wing
of the National Gallery and the New Glyndebourne Opera
House have been used as case studies.
Both buildings presented problems of management rather
than engineering. They were complex high risk projects,
with high profile, fixed, tight budgets, coupled with high
architectural merit and attention to detail.
This had a controversial history, including implementation
failures going back 20 years, including the 'carbuncle'
criticism from the Prince of Wales. It involved parochial
attitudes, affection for the 1838 Main National Gallery build-
ing and failed attempts at commercial funding. The funda-
mental requirement was a home for the National Gallery's
priceless collection of early Renaissance paintings, which
could not be satisfactorily exhibited in the old building.
The selected architects were Venturi Scott Brown of
Philadelphia, USA. Ten of the 40 trade contractors were
non-UK based. It is interesting to note that there was no
contractual claim from any of the non-UK based sub-
contractors, illustrating the cultural basis of the endemic
claims orientation in the UK construction industry. The use
of a construction management form of contract greatly
reduced the normal problems.
Funding was by Sainsbury Family Trusts, giving a sum
within which the building was to be completed. The budget
was fixed at £26 million for construction, unchanged after
approval was given to the project in March 1987. Plans and
designs were approved in December 1987 and work on site
started in January 1988, with completion in mid-1990: a
30-month construction period. Time, cost and quality were
all fixed at the start.
Figure 1 shows the Sainsbury Wing extension to the
National Gallery, of modern construction, with in situ
concrete structural frame and stone, brick or glass cladding
appropriate to each elevation. The 22 art gallery rooms
utilised stone and timber finishes, and high quality plaster
hanging surfaces.

205
The lean approach to project management: E Gabriel
i!
Figure 1 National Gallery-the Sainsbury Wing
The New Glyndebourne Opera House
Glyndebourne is the first opera house to be built in the UK
this century. The brief stipulated that Glyndebourne should
be out of operation for one opera season only, starting from
the close of the 1992 season in August 1992, with 'first
night' in the new building on 28 May 1994. To achieve this,
demolition began at the close of the final performance of the
1992 season, and the new building was handed over on 31
December 1993.
Funding was all by public subscription, with a con-
struction budget of £24 million.
Figure 2 is a view of the completed opera house. It is
of traditional load-bearing brick construction, using lime
mortar. The flytower, an architectural challenge in any
theatre, is a steel-framed structure clad in concrete and lead
panels. The most challenging quality issue was due to the
lack of artificial finishes and use of traditional materials,
i.e. 'what you build is what you see'. There was no
opportunity to cover up the structure and high standards
had to be achieved throughout the building process.
Client brief
A key element in the success of the Sainsbury Wing pro-
ject, and the lean management approach, was the com-
pletion of a detailed client brief in advance of the architect
appointment. An independent architect assisted in its prep-
aration. The brief spelled out the general architectural and
206
=
perception requirements and the detailed functional require-
ments for every space in the building. This was an essential
element of the lean approach. The Glyndebourne brief was
detailed in the same way.
The construction management type of contract and in-
tegrated project team avoided the 'trench warfare' so often
found in the presence of inevitable problems. Close working
relationships were achieved between all participants. This
did not mean that all was sweetness and light or that there
were no disagreements and arguments. Quite the contrary.
The important thing was to accept such problems as part
and parcel of the project and maintain a positive approach
throughout. There were weekly cost meetings at the design
and procurement level. Every change in design required
authorisation by the team and by the client project man-
ager. All agreed changes were identified and the paper-
work was completed in handwriting. Cost control was work
control.
Change order paperwork systems burn up management
man-hours, make control ineffective and blur responsibilities.
Stakeholders
'Stakeholders' included the donors, the National Gallery
trustees, National Gallery directorate, the Department of
the Environment and Westminster City Council.
Glyndebourne stakeholders were less diverse, the patrons,
Sir George and Lady Christie, the directors of Glyndebourne
Productions Limited and the Glyndebourne Arts Trust.

Figure 2 The New Glyndebourne Opera House
The project management approach
The approach was the same for both projects:
(1) The project manager was employed by the client and
acted independently. There were no other client project
management support staff. Accounts, legal, planning
and other services were all bought in as required. The
contract players were the project team.
All project management services, e.g. programming,
cost control, buildability, risk analysis, were services
provided by the 'players'. For example, cost control
and cost plan were put together and operated by the
professional cost consultant; project planning and
programming for the complete project was put together
by the construction manager; design planning was the
responsibility of the respective designers, their pro-
posals being incorporated into the project plan by the
construction manager. Team work was the essence.
(2) A paper on the project management principles was
issued by the project manager to the team, which stated
principles only. This ensured flexibility and the
participants' ownership of the systems.
(3) The project manager was required to forecast the cash
drawdown on the project bank account for 3 months
ahead, updated monthly. The average figure during the
peak period was about £600,000 per month on the
Sainsbury Wing, and £1.4 million on Glyndebourne to
accommodate the shorter time period. Risk management
was continuous, but formal risk analyses were carried
out at key times, e.g. for setting contingencies, in
deriving the budget and at around 75 % complete. Risk
The lean approach to project management: E Gabriel
analyses were carried out independently by the con-
struction manager and the cost consultant, for discussion
with the project manager.
(4) Project reports were produced monthly, for the client's
board meeting or management meeting. The principle
was of full disclosure of high level summary infor-
mation and 'no surprises'. As Sir Reginald Harland has
said, "surprise is one of the principles of war, but it
is the enemy who is supposed to be surprised, not your
allies/friends!" Adversarial forms of contract produce
surprises, usually unwelcome ones, exacerbated by a
diffuse and heavy management structure and unclear
responsibilities.
Client's organisation
Figure 3 shows the National Gallery client organisation.
The principle is common to both projects, differing only in
detail, in order to accommodate the different project en-
vironments and Client organisations. The project organisation
for the Sainsbury Wing is shown in Figure 4.
All formal communications between client and team in
both directions were via the project manager using the
mechanisms which he set up. This is the essence of the lean
management method. If members of the different arms of
the client organisation are permitted to communicate and
state requirements with work in progress, either design or
construction, then further controls are required and the
whole control and decision-making process becomes complex
and slow. There were no separate committees relating to
the project, and no independent investigation or reports
207
The lean approach to project management: E Gabriel

Complicated procedures are always produced by those

National Gallery - ~ Hampton Site Company I Donor Funding
Trustees / whose job it is to draft procedures. Those involved in the
BOARD
works have an eye to effectiveness and economic use of
time.
Project Advisor Architectnral
Stuart Lipton Advisor
Colin Amery Contingency
N G Services Limited Principal Design Contingencies of around 12 % were reserved under various
CLIENT Approvals categories, for example, design development, changes to
(Employer) the brief, site issues, cost escalation. They cover risks
involved in the procurement process, post-contract variations
and claims. Some of the contingency sum is allocated
within the budget to the team's building cost budget, and
Gallery Liaison I Client Project Manager I Project Control some to the client's reserve.
Group & Direction As an example, it was found during construction that the
I
Project Team
supertitles would not be seen from the rear of the Glynde-
bourne Box. The floor level was lowered to correct the
problem, an essential change for the theatre to work,
Figure 3 Client organisation--Sainsbury Wing funded from the design contingency.
As a second example, a proposal to extend the capacity
produced without the knowledge and involvement of the of the existing restaurant to accommodate the 50 % increase
project team. in seating capacity was rejected by the planning authority
The Glyndebourne client organisation was similar in on the grounds of its alleged visual impact. An additional
concept to that of the Gallery, but somewhat simpler, building was upgraded and added to the scope, the
having a patron and an existing operating organisation, additional cost funded from the client reserve.
Glyndebourne Productions Ltd. The project manager's task is to 'control the contingency'
and the process of allocation of the different categories
within the contingency fund enables him to do this.
Change control
This is a key function in both programme and cost control. Quality
It is paradoxical that a project is itself a process of con-
tinuous change, but within the project every change is The normal rules of quality were that the contractor under-
hazardous. All change is bad for the client and bad for took to produce what was specified in drawings and speci-
project performance. fications. Unfortunately, quality standards are not always
All changes were subject to authorisation by the project described in sufficient detail and there is a tendency for the
manager at the weekly cost meetings. This system, called the architect to demand the 'highest' quality throughout. This
DTR system (design team recommendation), is based on a can produce enormous problems and conflict, illustrated by
single hand-written sheet identifying the proposed change, the following issues.
the reason for it, the proposer, the estimated cost and pro-
Quality applied to services
gramme implications. The system is led by the construction
manager. Urgent low value instructions can be authorised From the Client's and the project's point of view 'the
retrospectively. Decision making is focused and immediate. best is the enemy of the good'. Attempts to obtain the
highest quality in purely functional non-public areas is
not good value for the client's money. A good example
PROJECT MANAGER
of this occurred at the National Gallery. There were
I I
I I I
repeated attempts to place cables in conduits chased into
concrete or brick walls in private areas where this was
Construction Mgr Architect Engineer Cost Consultant
Sir Robert VSBA Ove Arup Gardiner & unnecessary.
McAlpine Theobald Again a service area of the Gallery was designed to
have exposed ducting and services and was not a public
-- Associate area, nevertheless the contractor's drawings were modi-
Architect
Trade fied to ask for certain wiring to be chased into the walls,
Contractors I
Shephard
and even to change the type and colour of a fire alarm
bell from the traditional red, which was thought to be
Robson
Contract aesthetically unsuitable. Such attempts are not in the Client's
Administration interest and are a waste of money. Such changes were not
Specialist
permitted.
Consultants
A similar example at Glyndebourne was severe criticism
Legal
Planning of the services contractor's drawings showing services,
Insurance cables, trays and conduits mounted on a plain brick wall in
Lighting the backstage area. In the practical theatre situation, this
Glazing
Audio-visual wall is used for storage of scenery and would not be seen,
Commissioning yet the request came for the services to be distributed in a
Landscaping pattern more to aesthetic liking, another example of the
pursuit of a professional whim, without a proper regard for
Figure 4 Project organisation--Sainsbury Wing the Client's best interest.

208

Quality applied to materials
Another issue was concerned with natural materials, e.g.
stone, brick, timber. Small samples frequently presented
for client approval do not determine the appearance of a
larger area of the natural material. It was essential to have
a large sample at the quarry or at the workshop to which
reference could be made. In many cases the small samples
did not represent what was obtainable from the quarry at
all, and the material had to be changed.
In another case a floor sample of stone had a colour streak
and was snagged for replacement. In this case the Client
sponsor thought that it was a natural material and he was
very happy with the appearance. He added that if he had
wanted a uniform appearance he would have specified
linoleum!
This problem with natural materials, where architects
attempt to alter the perception to one of uniformity, was
common and has to be questioned, l e a n management enables
client interests to be represented without communication
delays.
Programming
The approach was to plan the construction work and the
prior information activities with great care and in detail and
decide upon realistic and accepted key events. The
procedure is to meet every key date precisely: project
management by objectives.
There are a number of spin-off advantages to this
approach. First, it avoids frequent reprogramming which in
practice is very difficult to implement without incurring
contractual penalties and site control difficulties. It also
reduces the incidence of additional cost and claim situations
which traditionally feed on the twin ogres of 'delay and
disruption'. If there are no delays it is very difficult to prove
disruption. This is not only good for the project time and
completion but is good for the contractors' profitability too,
although few of them recognise this to be the case!
Project management mechanisms
The mechanisms used for control in this lean management
approach were regular meetings, covering management,
design, user liaison, cost and progress. The important thing
in the lean management approach is to do everything
through these mechanisms, and to reduce letter writing to
a minimum.
Key elements of the lean approach to project
management
Client
• Individual project sponsor, or champion, representing
the client body and stakeholders.
• Individual client project manager: providing single point
authority and communications and instant decisions.
The lean approach to project management: E Gabriel
• Control of the Client by the client project manager.
• A tight team approach including the professional team,
the contractors and the Client.
• A construction management form of contract with
everyone contracted to the client and accountable via the
project manager.
Project team
• Rigorous change control with no delegation of authority
for additional costs above the authorised cost plan.
• Planning and control by objectives: fixed and accepted
key dates, even if money sometimes has to be spent to
hold dates. This is cheaper than claims.
• Mechanism: simple mechanisms and procedures, not
trouble-shooting.
• All project management services the responsibility of the
direct participants.
The apparent advantages of a main contractor approach
where supposedly the risk is off-loaded to a single con-
tractor is offset by the lack of control and an adversarial
claims-oriented environment.
Conclusions
Two examples have been given of the successful employ-
ment of the lean project management approach on a number
of difficult buildings. The approach avoids duplication, and
all services and mechanisms are operated and owned by
members of the project team. This contrasts with a trend for
the client to set up his own team, duplicating consultants'
and contractors' teams, which, apart from being extremely
expensive, results in more paperwork, layers of manage-
ment and a large number of management control and
approvals interfaces.
The lean approach to project management has worked
very successfully in potentially difficult and complex areas.
It led to a high level of commitment and motivation from
the team, and to the satisfaction of the whole Client
organisation.
It has the advantage of reducing risk to the client, with
the right balance of quality, performance and value for
money.
Eric Gabriel is a Chartered Engineer
with 36 years" experience in project
management in the power, process and
building industries. He is a past presi-
dent and honorary member of the
International Project Management
Association, and a vice-president of
the Association of Project Manage-
ment (UK). During the last 10 years
he has been client project manager
for a number of award-winning pres-
tigious arts buildings in the UK, and
is currently acting in this capacity for
the modernisation project at the
Royal National Theatre in London.
209