4 PHASES OF THE CHUNNEL PROJECT

INCEPTION PHASE: Mario La

1.

Project Management Area Inception Phase

Scope Management 2
Time Management 3
Cost Management 2
Quality Management 2
Human Resource Management 3
Communications Management 1
Risk Management 2
Procurement Management 2
Integration Management 3

2) Please highlight the major areas of strength in the management of this phase of the project:

The highlighted major Strengths were the Time management, Human resources, and

Integration Management.

3) Please highlight the major opportunity for the improvement in the management of the phase of

the project:

The Implementation Phase can improve Scope Management, Communications

Management, and Risk Management.

The Inception Phase of the Project shows some promise in the beginning, but once the

project started there were some mishaps along the way. Having two countries working together
on the project, there were bound to be communication errors with both speaking different

languages and receiving information. These come along with the quality of material needing to

be redefined based on the approval of safety protocols and with the ICG laws. These factors push

both the scheduling and the total cost higher. This results in putting a burden on both parties

involved. If there was a way to communicate with each other faster, there would have not lost on

the financial level. Communication was the key part when it came to a big project. The risk

would be higher, but if people who work on the project also do more research on the

requirements, they would not have many losses.

DEVELOPMENT PHASE:

Summary

The development phase of the project was an important phase. Unfortunately, this phase had a

lot of problems. It involved detailed planning, communication agreements, and government

approvals, yet a lot of these aspects of the project weren’t fulfilled. Detailed planning was hard

due to the enormous scope of the project. However, the project team was able to plan technical

equipment needed for the project at a reasonable performance. Unfortunately, this barely

mitigated the problems to understanding the scope of the project. IGC had problems with getting

approval for funding the project, which added more problems to the cost and scope management.

The difficulties in the cost management and planning can be partly blamed for the $2.25 billion

claim against Eurotunnel by a contracting company. Another problem that was brought to the

cost management is that the project involved being funded by banks. Since the banks had the

funds, they were given control on the project. In consequence, they were given too much leeway

on how to go about the project. The banks focused on minimizing risk. Usually, this can be a

good thing. However, this was taken to the extreme for the Chunnel Project. The efforts to
minimize cost and risk were soiled due to the claim and award settlement that went against

Eurotunnel. Fortunately, the quality aspect of the project was done well due to the IGC’s control

of the project.

Since the project consisted of two different countries speaking two different languages,

communication was a problem. There was no encouragement of teamwork. Even worse, the two

teams are at the opposite ends of each other. Even though both teams are working towards a

common goal, the lack of communication in its early stages led to different opinions in the later

stages of the project.

The project management team’s views on the project were rather hopeful. They had a

clear understanding of the size of the project. Unfortunately, they couldn’t come up with a plan

to deal with the immense size of the project. The nail in the coffin was hammered once the

management team gave up most of its control to the IGC. The risk/cost minimization, cultural

differences between the two working teams, and other challenges faced in this phase cooked a

recipe for disaster in the later stages of the project.

1.

Project Management Area Development Phase

Scope Management 1

Time Management 2

Cost Management 1

Quality Management 3

Human Resource Management 1

Communications Management 1
Risk Management 4

Procurement Management 3

Integration Management 1

2. The strengths during this phase of the project are that the project management team had a

grasp on how big the project was going to be. All technical aspects of the project was

well thought out and planned. In the later stages of the phase, when the IGC was

involved, risk management was heavily considered in the planning of this phase.

Moreover, the IGC’s involvement and control helped with the quality aspect of the

project.

3. An opportunity for improvement for the project can be that the project management team

could’ve kept their control of the project, and instead do further research to plan a way to

deal with the project scope. Another room for improvement is communication between

two countries. There could’ve been a way for both cultures to communicate their plan

and ideas in the early stages of project. Furthermore, teamwork between the two

countries could’ve been encouraged more.

IMPLEMENTATION PHASE: Enrique Amara

Project Management Area Implementation Phase

Scope Management 2

Time Management 2

Cost Management 2
 Quality Management 5

Human Resource Management 3

Communications Management 2

Risk Management 2

Procurement Management 3

Integration Management 3

2. The main strengths in the Implementation Phase of this project is quality management and

human resource management and procurement management and integration management.

3. The Implementation Phase can improve on scope management and time management and cost

management and communications management and risk management.

Summary

The implementation phase of the Chunnel project began in the fourth quarter in 1987, with the

awarding of a ‘Concession Contract” in response to the Channel Tunnel Group/France Manche

(CTG/FM) bid for US $5.5 billion dollars. However, it ended on December 15th, 1994, with the

project being handed over fully operational. The main proposal was made under a “build-own-

transfer” (BOT) arrangement, granting CTG/FM the concession to run the project for a period of

55 years (Morris, 1994), after which ownership would revert to the French and British

governments. Having gotten the approval for the proposal CTG/FM were granted a

“design/build/commission” construction contract to TML. The contractor was in a coalition of

construction companies which had investors (through join ventures) with the CTG/FM winner.

There were instances of conflicts between the client-contractor relationship. This would cause
problems as the project was implemented. When the construction contract was assigned, the cost

estimated to be US $4.3 billion dollars and the original start date was May 15th,1993. After the

implementation phase was completed, the project was 19th months late and had cost exceed of

some US $3 billion (total construction cost was US $7.1 billion). The close out phase goes more

in depth on the total cost impacted not only the construction cost but also more crucially, the lost

in profits and carrying cost of the project during the 19-month period. It is generally designated

that the Chunnel project displays magnificent opportunities for lesion learned in project

management, especially for capital-intensive projects, using new or proven technology, under

uncommon, or new high-risk conditions. There were other issues that stood out that should’ve

been see as warning signs.

1. Some of the rolling stock had not yet been designed (vehicle and freight cars).

2. No contingency was set aside to cover “unknown unknows.” (In this case, the need for a

ventilation system in the tunnels.)

3. The specification for British rolling stock and French rolling stock were not the same.

All these issues should have been noticed before and the details needed to be agreed to in

advance, and not having a resolution would only result in more delays and cost overrun. The

priorities of this project were to be identified and communicated clearly from the beginning.

This was perhaps a huge and most damaging failure of the governments of France and

Britain. The financial model that they created was far too promising given the risks involved,

and the face that the project was run by bankers that made it difficult. By not having real

objectives and having a scope defined early on, and by not implementing a contracting

method that directly connected thew rewards to contractors. Both governments set the stage

for financial challenges of the Chunnel project.

CLOSEOUT PHASE: Tyler Tran

Project Management Area Closeout Phase

Scope Management 2
Time Management 2
Cost Management 2
Quality Management 4
HR Management 2
Communications Management 2
Risk Management 2
Procurement Management 1
Integration Management 3

2. Please highlight the major areas of strength in the management of this phase of the project

Quality management was the only management area that proved to be a strong point in the

closeout phase of the project and in the project in general. The quality standards that were

achieved by the project were above the industry average and the project was deemed one of the

greatest engineering and political feats.

3. Please highlight the major opportunities for improvement of this phase of the project

During the closeout phase, the Chunnel project had a couple of opportunities to improve upon,

mainly regarding project scope and communication. In terms of scope, the overall scope of the

project changed many times throughout the project. There were many change requests that were

brought up including requirements such as an air conditioning system throughout the tunnel.

Summarizing the project, Kirkland states: “We should seek to advise future generations

contemplating the creation of very large infrastructure developments not to get carried away by

the excitement of the design and construction process”. This statement made by Kirkland

describes the scope situation very well. There was a great opportunity to fix the overall scope of

the project through closeout by rejecting some scope modifications and having set requirements
and sticking with them. This open-ended nature of the scope led to many schedule and cost

delays that caused considerable damage and was impossible to mitigate during the closeout

phase. Another opportunity that could have improved the project is the introduction of team-

building activities. With the language barrier between countries and stakeholders, an effective

team-building exercise could prove very beneficial to communication between the two parties.

Although small in change, this exercise could have caused change management aspects of the

project to improve drastically regarding funding requests and schedule delays. Overall, the

Chunnel project delivered a quality product that is deemed successful.

SUMMARY OF PROJECT ASSESSMENT AND ANALYSYS

Project Inception Development Implementation Closeout Average

Management Phase Phase Phase Phase
Area
Scope 2 1 2 2 2
Management
Time 3 2 2 2 2
Management
Cost 2 1 2 2 2
Management
Quality 2 3 5 4 4
Management
Human 3 1 3 2 2
Resource
Management
Communicatio 1 1 2 2 3
ns
Management
Risk 2 4 2 2 3
Management
Procurement 2 3 3 1 2
Management
Integration 3 1 3 3 3
Management
Average 2 2 3 2

2. Please highlight the major areas of strength in the management of this project
3. Please highlight the major opportunities for improvement in the management of this project
The areas of importance regarding the weaknesses of the project are mostly to do with cost and
contract management. In the case study, there were many contractual issues that could have been
addressed better. A solution to the contractual issues that have arisen during the management of
the project could be to establish a standardized set of rules that must be met to issue changes in
the project. This promotes a more uniform decision-making process and does not allow the
different groups involved in the project to force a change. This way of determining if the project
needs to be changed helps better structure the overall scope and risk of the project and the
changes associated with it. Overall, a standardized set of rules that must be met before change
will give the project management more control. For example, without rules, the project scope
became more favorable towards the bankers of the project as opposed to the actual delivery of a
quality product. This led to many obstacles arising regarding cost and deliverability as well as
conflict between priorities and parties.
4. Please highlight the major project management lessons learned from this project
The Chunnel project provided a lot of mistakes and success that is valuable in teaching project
management. Some major lessons learned from the project range from strategic planning to the
importance of communication. Being such a large project that is also international, it is important
to take away the fact that the project must be very meticulously planned. Technical specifications
and requirements for the project must be agreed upon and established before the project is even
implemented to have an accurate estimate of cost and time. Having clear objectives for the
project with appropriate compensation for the stakeholders is also extremely important for the
success of the project as well. Other aspects of project management such as having a method for
evaluating and approving changes in the project should be established before implementation as
well. The Chunnel project also showed the importance of collaborating and working in a team.
Establishing roles in a team with set expectations and responsibilities should be defined upfront
to make sure there are minimal mistakes that lead to control and risk problems.