CII - Topic-Summary-Details 18/10/23, 8:32 PM

Home ⟩ Resources ⟩ Knowledge Base ⟩ best practices ⟩ quality management ⟩ rt-320

Search the Knowledge Base

Back To Knowledge
De#nition and Measurement of Engineering/Design Summary

Deliverable Quality (Best Practice)

 Print
RT-320 Topic Summary
 Share

Overview  Advanced Keyword Search

Defects in engineering/design deliverables negatively affect project performance in terms of cost, schedule, and safety,
by causing signiFcant amounts of rework in the design and/or construction phases. RT-320 offers capital project teams
key guidance on assessing both the design quality and the design completeness of the most problematic
engineering/design deliverables.

RT-320 took a bottom-up, priority-driven approach to understanding design quality defects, impacts, causes, and
methods of measuring design quality. The team began by identifying the 11 most problematic deliverables and the 73
most common and signiFcant defects associated with these deliverables. The research team then identiFed 349 causal
factors, from which were derived 118 leading and 23 lagging metrics. With additional insight from published literature
and corporate practices, the team identiFed 266 completeness checklist items for the 11 most problematic
deliverables. Finally, RT-320 developed two implementation tools: the Design Deliverable Quality Assessment (DDQA)
tool and the Completeness of Design Deliverable Checklist (CDDC) tool. IR320-2, Tools for Enhancing the Quality of
Problematic Design Deliverables, presents the major Fndings of this research, the highlights of the two implementation
tools, the inputs and outputs of the tools, and the roles and responsibilities of potential users.
Provide Feedback?

Key Findings and Implementation Tools

1 : Design Quality Essentials

Based on prior published literature, RT-320 deFned design deliverable quality in terms of their completeness,
correctness, and timeliness.

https://www.construction-institute.org/resources/knowledgebase/best-practices/quality-management/topics/rt-320 Page 1 of 8
te

C
CII - Topic-Summary-Details 18/10/23, 8:32 PM

Co
le t
mp

rre
Co

ct
gledge
Base-romCIl

Timely
Figure1.DesignQualityEssentials

Reference: (RS320-1)

2 : Relative Frequency of Deliverable Quality Problems per Deliverable Type

RT-320 surveyed industry to identify the most problematic deliverables in terms of quality (N=67). The RT found
similarities in the relative frequency of design quality problems encountered by owners (X-axis value) and
contractors (Y-axis value).

Reference: (RS320-1)

3 : The 11 Most Problematic Design Deliverables

https://www.construction-institute.org/resources/knowledgebase/best-practices/quality-management/topics/rt-320 Page 2 of 8
CII - Topic-Summary-Details 18/10/23, 8:32 PM

No. Deliverable
1 FEED Validation Deliverables
2 Level 3 Baseline Schedule
3 Constructability Inputs
4 P&IDs
5 Equipment SpeciFcations & Data Sheets
6 Maintainability Inputs
7 Vendor Data
8 3D Model & Clash Detection
9 Piping Routing & Isometrics
10 Nozzles, Ladders, & Platforms for Towers/Vessels/Tanks
11 Misc. Pipe Support Drawings

From the scatter plot shown in Key Finding #2, RT-320 concluded that deliverables are “problematic” if quality
problem frequency is between “Sometimes (3.0)” and “Too Often (5.0).”

Reference: (RS320-1)

4 : Analysis of 73 Signi#cant Design Deliverable Defects (Deliverable Defects List)

The industry survey (N=36) identiFed 798 common defects associated with the 11 problematic deliverables. RT-320
consolidated and aggregated these common defects, developing a list of 73 signiFcant design deliverable defects
(6.63 defects per deliverable on average). Among the 73 defects, 24 percent pertain to completeness, 60 percent
pertain to correctness, and 16 percent pertain to timeliness.

Deliverable Defect

1.Insufficientscopedefinitionresultinginchangesduringdetailed
design
2.BasisofDesignisincomplete/wrong
3.InexperiencedmembersofFEEDand/orDesignteamresultingin
poordesign/defectsandchangesthatcouldbeavoided
1.FEEDValidation 4.Scheduleimpactsduetopoorplanning,understandingoflogic
Deliverables andsequencingespeciallyforlong-leaditems
5.Toomanychanges(projectleadershipunwillingtosay"No")
resultinginunnecessaryscopegrowthwithcostandschedule
impacts
6.Projectsareallowedtopassthrough"gates"inspiteofthe
factthattheprojectisnotwelldefinedand/ortherisksarenot
mitigated
7.TheLevel3BaselineSchedufelogicdoesnotreflecttheproject's
currentexecutionstrategy
8.Theresourceloadingand/oractivitydurationsintheLevel3
BaselineScheduleareinaccurate
9.Vendordata-relatedactivitiesintheLevel3BaselineSchedule
2.Level3Baseline arenotcorrect/integrated(i.e.,complete,withgoodlogic
Schedule sequenced,withrealisticdurations)
10.Designdeliverable-relatedactivitiesintheLevel3Baseline
Scheduleareeithermissingorinadequatelyrepresented
11.TheLevel3BaselineScheduleisnotissuedontime
12.TheLevel3BaselineScheduleinadequatelydepictsthe
construction-to-commissioninghandover,withallitsmilestones

Reference: (IR320-2)

5 : Defects Analysis Table

RT-320 identiFed 349 causal factors associated with the 73 signiFcant defects by utilizing a “5-Whys”
approach. The table summarizes the defect type, impact type, and causal factors of each signiFcant defect.

https://www.construction-institute.org/resources/knowledgebase/best-practices/quality-management/topics/rt-320 Page 3 of 8
CII - Topic-Summary-Details 18/10/23, 8:32 PM

Reference: (IR320-2)

6 : Leading & Lagging Metrics (Metrics-Timing Table)

The research team:

generated 118 leading metrics associated with the deliverable defects and causal factors.
generated 23 lagging metrics associated with the deliverable defects and defect impacts.
identiFed timing of measurement for each assessment.

Membership Resources AppendixC

Groups Events Awards About CII Blog 
Metrics-TimingTable 
Search

11ProblematicDeliverables,DefectNumbers TimingofMeasurement
LG:Laggingindicator
D:Leadingindicator

Level3BaseSched

Construct'tyInputs

Misc.PipeSupport
PipingRouting/Iso
Maintain'tyInputs

Nozzles,Ladders
FEEDValidation

DetailedDesign
3DModel/Clash

Metric Progress
Eqpt.Specs

VendorData

IFP
P&IDs

FV30%60%90%IFC

LeadingMetrics
1.Istheprojectrequiredtouseapproved LD

BasetromCl
suppliersorpreferredvendors?
2.WasFrontEndEngineeringDesign(FEED)
scope,asaninputtodetaileddesign,formally LD
validatedviaPDRI,peerreview,orsimilar
preparednessevaluationtool?
3.Wasatleastoneconstructabilityreview
meetingconductedduringearlyFEED/Design LD 21
Developmentorbefore?
4.Doestheplannedmaintainabilityeffortscope,
definedduringFEED/DesignDevelopment,
includeallofthefollowing:
-understandingoflocalmaintenancepracticesand LD 36
staffcapabilities
-sparepartsphilosophyandapproach
-maintainabilitysafetyandergonomics
requirements

Reference: (IR320-2)

7 : Deliverable Completeness Checklist

https://www.construction-institute.org/resources/knowledgebase/best-practices/quality-management/topics/rt-320 Page 4 of 8
CII - Topic-Summary-Details 18/10/23, 8:32 PM

Based on prior published literature, four RT company models, and RT discussions, RT-320 developed a total of 266
completeness checklist items (approximately 24 items per deliverable type, on average). This checklist can help
project teams seeking a high level of completeness for their engineering deliverables.

Reference: (IR320-2)

8 : Recommended Timing of Substantial Completeness by Deliverable

RT-320 identiFed the recommended timing for application of the deliverable completeness checklist.

https://www.construction-institute.org/resources/knowledgebase/best-practices/quality-management/topics/rt-320 Page 5 of 8
CII - Topic-Summary-Details 18/10/23, 8:32 PM

Reference: (RS320-1)

9 : Implementation Tool #1

Design Deliverable Quality Assessment (DDQA) Tool

The DDQA tool performs the following functions:

a. addresses the 11 most problematic deliverables
b. selects the appropriate leading metrics according to user input on targeted design deliverable(s) and relevant
project timing milestone(s)
c. provides design quality indices for each targeted design milestone and deliverable.
d. provides a list of metrics that were responded to as "NO"
e. provides a list of potential defects possibly associated with metrics answered as "NO"
f. facilitates documentation of path-forward corrective actions (based on project team discussions) to
eliminate/mitigate potential defects.

Reference: (IR320-2)

10 : Implementation Tool #2

Completeness of Design Deliverable Checklist (CDDC) Tool

The CDDC tool performs the following functions:

a. focuses on the 11 most problematic deliverables
b. facilitates assessment of completeness checklist items pertaining to the selected deliverable(s)
c. provides completeness indices for the selected deliverables
d. generates a list of items not currently substantially complete, for each selected deliverable.

Reference: (IR320-2)

rt-320

Key Performance Indicators

Improved design, Improved cost, Improved schedule, Improved safety, Improved quality (reduced rework)

Research Publications

 Tools for Enhancing the Quality of Problematic Design Deliverables - IR320-2

Publication Date: 12/2016 Type: Implementation Resource Pages: 123 Status: Tool

 View Details  Order Now

 Engineering Deliverables: Get It Right the First Time - RS320-1

Publication Date: 12/2016 Type: Research Summary Pages: 25 Status: Supporting Product

 View Details  Order Now

 Study of Engineering/Design Deliverable Quality - RR320-11

Publication Date: 12/2016 Type: Research Report Pages: 244 Status: Reference

 View Details  Order Now

Presentations from CII Events

https://www.construction-institute.org/resources/knowledgebase/best-practices/quality-management/topics/rt-320 Page 6 of 8
CII - Topic-Summary-Details 18/10/23, 8:32 PM

 Plenary Session - Engineering Deliverables: Get It Right the First Time

Publication Date: 08/2016 Presenter: Number of Slides: 20 Event Code: AC2016

 Implementation Session - Engineering Deliverables: Get It Right the First Time

Publication Date: 08/2016 Presenter: Number of Slides: 16 Event Code: AC2016

Tags

Knowledge Areas: Quality Management

Project Phase: Detailed Design (Engineering)

Project Function/Role: Architects & Engineering, Commissioning & Startup, Construction, External
Stakeholders, Operations & Maintenance, Project Management, Quality
Management

Industry Group: Buildings, Heavy Industrial, Infrastructure, Light Industrial

Regions: Africa – South Africa, Asia – China, India, Southeast Asia, Australia,
Europe – Scandinavia, Russia, Middle East, North America – USA,
Canada, Mexico, South America – Central America, Brazil

10-10 input Metrics: Controlling, Design Efficiency, Planning, Quality

Keywords
Problematic deliverables, Deliverable completeness, Defect analysis, Engineering deliverable quality, Deliverable
correctness, Defect impacts, Design deliverable quality, Deliverable timeliness, Defect causal factor, Engineering quality,
Deliverable defects, Leading indicators, Design quality, Engineering/Design defects, Lagging indicators, rt320

Featured Items

About the Knowledge Base Knowledge Base Glossary What's New

CII, based at The University of Texas at Austin, is the research and development center Add An Account |
for the capital projects industry.

Join Now

© 2023 Construction Industry Institute™ All rights reserved

3925 W. Braker Lane, Austin, Texas 78759 map
Privacy Policy | Contact Us | Site Map
https://www.construction-institute.org/resources/knowledgebase/best-practices/quality-management/topics/rt-320 Page 7 of 8
CII - Topic-Summary-Details 18/10/23, 8:32 PM

Privacy Policy | Contact Us | Site Map

https://www.construction-institute.org/resources/knowledgebase/best-practices/quality-management/topics/rt-320 Page 8 of 8