Error Reduction Framework pilot project update

GIRI’s Error Reduction Framework pilot project at Graham Group has identified key causes of error in the concreting process. The business is preparing to move into the next phase of the pilot, employing the Tiger Team approach to develop interventions and reduce the frequency and impact of these errors, GIRI members heard at the May meeting.

The GIRI Error Reduction Framework aims to improve an organisation's ability to identify, address and prevent errors in a structured, effective, and proactive way. As well as deepening understanding of the root causes of error, it provides a strategic approach to reducing error and an opportunity to tackle systemic issues within organisations and projects, leading to long-term improvements in behaviour and company culture.

The pilot project started at Graham in September 2024. In the first progress update in November, innovation director Emer Murnaghan OBE told GIRI members that the business had decided to focus on errors in concreting and had identified 35 distinct errors from the 250 that were put forward by attendees at a series of workshops. These were being validated with the aim of identifying five or six errors for cost modelling.

“We chose concrete as the focus based on the information from non-conformance reports,” explained Michael McCusker, Graham’s head of quality ‒ civil engineering, at the spring meeting update. “We are a civil engineering firm, and we work with concrete a lot, so it’s not a surprise that this is an area where we have many issues. If we look at NCRs over the last five to six years, concrete is consistently the main offender, and even though we have worked on training and communications internally, and developed competence and knowledge within the business, there is a still a lot of room for improvement.”

Oana Sala, principal consultant at Expedition Engineering, which is leading the pilot project in collaboration with Graham and GIRI, explained that the main challenge in narrowing down the list of 35 errors was prioritising them. “We tried cost modelling, but that proved very difficult, so we defined the lower and higher impacts of each error and tried to understand the frequency per year. We also looked at whether each error was specific to a project or occurring over multiple projects. This meant we could still make an informed decision about which to focus on.”

Michael added that the business also employed an effort/reward matrix, looking for those errors that could be addressed quickly and those that would take more time. Ultimately, the errors chosen for the pilot project were in the areas of concrete delivery, setting-out, and rebar congestion/poor detailing.

“Concrete delivery was one of the surprising things that cropped up during the project. We don’t see it come up on NCRs, but it is one of the root causes of error as often a pour that should have started at 9am doesn’t start until 11am, which means everyone is rushing and things don’t get done properly. That is something we can work on with our suppliers.”

Setting-out errors, in contrast, is an area for in-house focus. “We are already working on this and we have training programmes in place, but are they working and are they effective? We need to understand the cause of the issue. Then the rebar congestion issue is more external. We know this is an problem across the industry, and it is far too common, which is why we are looking into this error.”

Errors identified, the project then moved into its second stage – a detailed diagnosis of the root causes. This involved process mapping to identity primary root causes, which were then prioritised and analysed using fault trees/5 Whys to identify key actions for intervention. A GIRI Error Maturity Matrix assessment review was also carried out to identify key factors impacting behaviours. 

“At each stage we are measuring behaviour and focusing on whether we have the right tools in place, and whether people have the right training and competencies,” said Michael. “One of the good things that came out of the pilot is that people feel the management processes are there but we are lacking in positive motivational aspects – the things that are pushing people to do the right thing. And that’s where we want to be moving towards.”

Michael added that another benefit of the pilot is that it has enabled Graham to identify not only the people who contribute to the problem and those affected by it, but also those who will be involved in finding solutions. And this is where the Tiger Team approach comes in for the next stage of the project.

Tiger Teams are multi-disciplinary groups of experts brought together to solve tough and often urgent engineering challenges. Graham has already used this approach successfully on specific projects and the business is now in the process of forming the team that will work on the identified concrete errors. “They will identify where we need to focus, whether it is an internal issue, linked to relationships with suppliers, or requires more engagement with GIRI principles,” said Michael.