MT314 Group Submission

Members of the group:

Gerard Caminal Altimir - 22114599

Erik Pascual Arenas - 22114823

Nicolas Fuenmayor Arango - 22115242

Alvaro Valentin Insa Segarra -

22115252
Introduction:

This work has been carried out on The Channel Tunnel project, better known as
"The Chunnel", an undersea tunnel linking southern England and northern France.

After considering the option of making the project of several themes, we decided to
choose it because of the innovative idea and the opportunity it presented at that
time. In addition, our working group found the idea of such a large project very
attractive.

During the present work we will see the different points made and explained in the
project management class. More specifically, we will talk about project scope
management, project timeline management, project human resources management,
project cost management and finally project risk management.
Project Scope management

The scope of the Eurotunnel project was to create one of the world’s Largest
Privately Funded construction projects. It consists of a fixed transportation (51,5km)
link between the United Kingdom and France by constructing two tunnels under the
English Channel. The project aimed to connect the cities of Folkestone in the United
Kingdom and Calais in France with a railway tunnel for both passenger and freight
trains. The expectation of this project was that this would spur economic
development, improve European trade, and provide an alternative high-speed
transportation method to the existing modes like planes and ferry boats. More
specifically, some of the main objectives of the project were:

· To improve transportation links: The Chunnel had to provide a faster and

more reliable transportation link between the UK and France, enabling people
and goods to move quickly and efficiently between the two countries.

· To increase economic and trade opportunities: By facilitating faster

movement of people and goods, the Chunnel has the potential to increase
economic and trade opportunities between the UK and France, as well as the rest
of Europe.

· To promote tourism: The Chunnel provides a unique travel experience to

attracts many tourists. The Chunnel has helped to promote tourism and cultural
exchange between the UK and France.

· To enhance political relations: The construction of the Chunnel was seen as

a symbol of the close political and economic ties between the UK and France.
The Chunnel has helped to strengthen these ties by providing a physical
connection between the two countries.
Furthermore, one of the most important parts that made the project possible were
the stakeholders. During our analysis and investigation of the planification and
design of the project, we found that the 2 governments, French and British
specifically, collaborated to carry out the project successfully. Also a total of 220
banks participate in the project covering all the financial and economic parts of the
project. Talking about the financial part, a large number of contractors participate in
the formation of the project and also the Regulatory Agencies (IGC).

The scope of the project was also extensive and involved many different
components, including:

· The design and construction of the two tunnels.

· The installation of rail infrastructure.

· The construction of support facilities on both sides of the Channel.

The scope also included the development of safety and emergency procedures, as
well as the establishment of security measures to protect the tunnel from potential
security threats. It means that the project had to comply with some of the key
characteristics like:

· Safety: Safety was a top priority for the Chunnel project, and a wide range of
safety requirements were put in place to protect workers and ensure the tunnel's
safety. These included requirements for ventilation, fire safety, and emergency
procedures.
 · Durability: The Chunnel needed to be built to last, and this required the use of
high-quality materials and engineering techniques that could withstand the harsh
marine environment and heavy use over time.

· Capacity: The Chunnel was designed to handle a high volume of traffic, both in
terms of passengers and freight. This required the development of an efficient
railway system and the use of large, modern trains that could transport people
and goods quickly and safely.

· Speed: One of the primary objectives of the Chunnel was to create a fast,
reliable transportation link between the UK and France. To achieve this, the
Chunnel had to be designed to support high-speed trains, with track and
signaling systems that could support speeds of up to 186 mph (300 km/h).

· Comfort: The Chunnel needed to provide a comfortable and pleasant

experience for passengers, with features such as air conditioning, comfortable
seating, and on-board amenities.

· Environmental impact: The Chunnel project was required to meet a range of

environmental requirements, including minimizing disturbance to marine life,
reducing noise pollution, and protecting the surrounding natural habitats.

The project was initially scheduled for opening on 15 May, 1993 with a total budget
of £5 billion. This meant that the time taken between design consideration and
completion of the project was set at seven years.

In addition, during the inception phase, we found that various milestones were
completed:

- 1974 – Initial tunnel ideas gathered.

- 1978 – British and French discussions resumed.

- 1983 – French and British banks and contractors propose tunnel scheme.

- 1985 – French and British governments ask for fixed link proposals.
 - 1986 – Anglo-French Treaty signed, Transmache Link (TML) awarded
contract and Eurotunnel declared owner of 55 year concession for the link.

Project Timeline Management

Every project starts from an idea. The idea for a tunnel between the two countries
was first proposed in the early 19th century, but it was not until the late 20th century
that the project became a reality. The first proposal for a tunnel was made in 1802 by
a French mining engineer named Albert Mathieu. However, the idea was not
pursued further due to concerns about the feasibility of the project, including
ventilation and the risk of flooding.

After the idea was proposed, 50 years later in 1856, Frenchman Aimé Thomé de
Gamond created a plan to dig two tunnels. One from Great Britain and one from
France, that meet in the middle on an artificial island.

It was not until the 20th century that serious consideration was given to the idea of a
tunnel beneath the English Channel. In 1955, the British and French governments
formed a joint committee to investigate the feasibility of a tunnel. The committee
concluded that a tunnel was indeed feasible, but the cost and political considerations
prevented the project from going ahead at that time.

Later in 1973, Britain and France agreed on an underwater railway that would link
their two countries. All the geologic investigations began and digging started.
However, two years later, Britain pulled out because of an economic recession.
In November 1984, the British and French governments signed a treaty to proceed
with the construction of the Channel Tunnel. Construction work began on both UK
(Shakespeare Cliff) and French (Sangatte) sides of the channel and it took seven
years to complete. In June 1992, the installation of a complex signalling, control and
communication system began. The tunnel was officially opened on May 6, 1994, and
regular passenger and freight services began operating later that year.

Project Human resource management

The construction of the Chunnel required a great number of human resources, and
the management of this played a crucial role in its success. To get started, the
project required the cooperation of two national governments, bankers, contractors,
and regulatory agencies.

On a rating scale, we can say the Human resources management was excellent,
because the right amount of workers were employed, and the efficiency of these was
flawless, given that the tunneling was finished three months ahead of schedule.
Keeping this in mind, we can assume each team member has a responsibility for the
quality, and given that the quality requirements, quality planning, quality assurance,
and quality control were mostly defined up-front, we arrive at the conclusion of the
great management of the human resources.

About 43 contractors were employed on the project to complete the design

requirements and development, and approximately 15,000 workers were hired.

We can divide the management of human resources in 6 key steps:

1. Human Resource Planning: The first step was to determine the required number
and types of workers for the project. This involved identifying the skills and expertise
needed to complete the project, as well as the number of workers required at each
stage of the construction.
2. Recruitment: The project team used a variety of recruitment methods to attract
qualified workers, including advertising, referrals, and partnerships with labor unions.
3. Selection: Once a pool of potential workers was identified, the project team used a
variety of selection methods to choose the best candidates for each position. These
methods included interviews, tests, and assessments of prior work experience and
qualifications.
4. Training and Development: The project team provided extensive training and
development opportunities for workers to ensure they had the necessary skills and
knowledge to complete their work safely and efficiently.
5. Performance Management: The project team closely monitored worker
performance and provided feedback on a regularly. This helped workers identify
areas for improvement and provided opportunities for recognition and reward.
6. Team Building: The Chunnel project involved workers from many different
countries and cultures. The project team organized team-building activities and
created opportunities for workers to interact and collaborate, which helped to build a
cohesive and effective team.

If we divide the management between the two governments: The English side
recruited 50% of traveling men, and housed them in temporary camps. The safety
record was poor, and the senior managers didn’t get along. On the French side, 95%
of the workers were from a depressed region. The union structure was more
organized, and the atmosphere was more harmonious.
Project Cost Management
When the Eurotunnel was built, it was the most expensive project in history. The
financing for the Eurotunnel was estimated at $5.5 billion, although it eventually
reached $9 billion.

The Eurotunnel project was designed and built by TML, but TML did not finance it.
Since governments did not want to cover the construction costs either, they had to
look for financing from private companies.

Finally, the company CTG/FN made an offer of $5500 million and this offer was
accepted. The bid was accepted because the estimated cost was US$4.3 billion, and
this entry was in line with the project's initial budget. However, when the
implementation phase was completed, they were confronted with a cost overrun of
US$3 billion, 80% more than previously estimated. The cost overrun was due in part
to increased safety, security and environmental requirements. Financing costs were
140% higher than expected.

A certain mistrust appeared because both the English and French governments did
not want to take over the financing, but they did make security demands. In addition,
since there was a competitive bid from external companies, if they wanted the
project they had to offer lower costs than the competitors did. In order to offer the
lowest possible costs, the external companies had to assume the best possible
scenario for a project that was not well defined and could have higher costs than
initially expected.

Due to the pressure from CTG/FM, TML Company looked to provide fixed-price
contracts to its suppliers and subcontractors. If they had fixed-price contracts, the
company's costs would be lower and they would have a higher profit margin, due to
the fact that the scope of the project was not sufficiently defined.

During the information search in the development phase, a cost management

problem appeared. The contracting company against the Eurotunnel made a claim
for US$ 2.25 billion. Finally, the court agreed with the contracting company and
Eurotunnel had to pay said cost.

At the peak of construction, we found that the Company needed 15,000 workers and
12 tunnel-boring machines. The cost of the workers was more than 3 million pounds
per day and each tunnel-boring machine was 15 million dollars.

In the last part of the project, most of the effort was focused on analyzing the
sources of cost overruns and try to place blame on one of the participating
organizations. The focus during closure was on trying to minimize the number of
complaints rather than really analyzing the causes of cost overruns.
Project Risk Management

Arguably the construction of this tunnel is the most risky of all constructions, due to
the changing conditions, generally more extended costs, length of the tunnel and
limited access to technology, the idea had always existed, but had never been
carried out due to the number of drawbacks.

On this occasion, good risk management on the French and British sides made the
project a success.The main risks of the tunnel are security and the economic risks.

The biggest threat was fire, and to counteract this risk a large investment was made
in fire detection and extinguishing systems. Each tunnel had 33 detection points and
numerous sensors that were highly developed for the time. There were restrictions
on the transport of flammable goods, as this posed a high risk of fire and was very
difficult to extinguish, as well as to withstand the smoke inside.

A year after the inauguration, a fire broke out on one of the trains. Good risk
management ensured that this catastrophe did not compromise the project.
Other major risks that could be fatal were electrical failures, as all the systems used
needed electricity, as well as the lack of oxygen at such shallow depths. The risk
management team took action to prevent these risks.

The construction of the Eurotunnel faced its worst economic crisis. This was due to
numerous delays, machinery breakdowns, fires, but above all storage problems. The
rapid progress of the British construction site meant that the project was threatened
by the lack of space to store the concrete. This increased the economic risk of cost
overruns.

The banks had too much control over this project, as they were financing it to a large
extent. The banks focused on minimizing cost. This taken to the extreme can be
detrimental to the project and failures can occur. Quality problems, delays, under-
qualified staff can occur.

The risks on the technical side of the project could have been better analyzed and
studied. In every construction project, one works in the hope of shortening the
completion time, but when the technology is innovative, the risks increase, as it is
unproven. Later it was found that older, equally efficient machinery could be used to
minimize risks.

Despite the fact that trying to minimize the construction time of a project increases
the risk, the Eurotunnel was successfully completed 3 months ahead of schedule,
which shows what great risk management was in place.

Finally this project is a great example of how managers must deal with unforeseen
events and crises, as well as having great risk management. This will allow the
project to move forward in a successful way.

Ways in which the project could have been improved

During the lifetime of a project, there are always many things that could be changed
for better, and this project is no exception. During our analysis in the different
sections of the project, we have detected some aspects that if they had been taken
into account before, the management of the project would have been better.

To get started, one thing that could have improved is the calculation and estimation
of the total cost of the project. As we can see in the project cost management, the
estimated cost was $5.5 billion, but the total amount of the project was finally $9
billion. This is an overwhelming difference with respect to the initial budget. So if they
had better anticipated the total cost of the project taking into account the available
resources, the management of suppliers, the number of workers and machines, etc,
then they would have been able to estimate the total cost of the project.
Another point, talking about the economy and the budget of the project, is the
timeline where the two governments decided to get started with the project. In the
timeline management, we saw that the idea of the project was initially proposed
without having either the resources available or the technology capable of carrying
out such a construction. Years later, the British and the France government agreed
to carry on the project but then Britain pulled out because of an economic recession.
We believe that in order to carry out a project, from the very beginning, the times and
situations must be well defined. In this case, we believe that it was a mistake to carry
out the project on these dates due to the different situations that both countries have
experienced.

Finally, if we pay attention to the Project risk management. Maybe motivated by the
desire of greatness and innovation, the technology used was very innovative, and for
this reason it was experimental and almost untested. For this reason, the use of this
technology was a risk, and later it was proved that older technology would have been
less risky and more efficient.
List of references:
Anbari, F. T., Giammalvo, P., Jaffe, P., Letavec, C., & Merchant, R. (2009). The
Chunnel Project. Case Studies in Project Management.
https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/chunnel-project-case-study-13317

Frank T. Anbari (n.d). The Chunnel Project.

https://barron.rice.edu/Courses/610/610_11/project_management_fall_2011/
Chunnel_Project_FTA_Final.pdf

Laura Patricia Cepeda (2013). The Risks of a Project: The Channel Tunnel.
http://proyectonegociosunibe.blogspot.com/2013/06/tema-3-los-riesgos-de-un-
proyecto-el.html

Nilesh Dhotre (2015). Summary chunnel tunnel project management.

https://www.slideshare.net/NileshDhotre/summary-chunnel-tunnel-project-
management

Naveen Srivatsav, Jacob Joys, Zilin Wang, Karim Safty and, Rishabh Kapoor
(n.d).The Channel Tunnel: A Project Management Perspective.
https://www.academia.edu/7035250/
The_Chunnel_Project_Management_Retrospective

UKEssays (2018). PROJECT MANAGEMENT: The Channel tunnel.

https://www.ukessays.com/essays/management/project-management-the-chunnel-
tunnel-project-management-essay.php?vref=1

Chen-Yu ChangGraham Ive (2007). The hold-up problem in the management of

construction projects: A case study of the Channel Tunnel
https://reader.elsevier.com/reader/sd/pii/S0263786307000038?
token=C1B5855D3114A842B9941A031A6857874B0BBCC59B159A2EACD587F2B
9B1EFBB805AB7C54A8A932D796C38DA543BB4E1&originRegion=eu-west-
1&originCreation=20230306114511
Pierre-Jean Pompée (n.d). CHANNEL TUNNEL PROJECT OVERVIEW
https://batisseurs-tunnel.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/1-Le-Projet-Tunnel-sous-
La-Manche_C1.pdf
global infrastructure hub (2020). The Channel Tunnel
https://www.gihub.org/connectivity-across-borders/case-studies/the-channel-tunnel/

Jennifer Rosenberg (2019). Chunnel Timeline: A Chronology of the Building of the

Chunnel
https://www.thoughtco.com/building-of-chunnel-timeline-1779424