This paper draws together the results of three RAND Corporation studies that examined cost, schedule, and performance problems commonly encountered by pioneer chemical process plants; assessed the information policies and practices of 19 medium to large firms in the process industries; and analyzed the effects of certain management practices on project outcomes — cost, schedule, and performance — especially for pioneer plant projects. These studies found that few firms keep records on problems that occurred in startup, how they were resolved, and information relevant to understanding cost, schedule, and performance problems. As a result, many firms fail to capture fully the benefits of being technology pioneers. The studies also found that when project management used a team approach, sharing responsibility for project outcomes among R&D, process development, engineering, construction services, startup, and operations divisions, pioneer plants had shorter startup times and less cost growth.
This report is part of the RAND Corporation Paper series. The paper was a product of the RAND Corporation from 1948 to 2003 that captured speeches, memorials, and derivative research, usually prepared on authors' own time and meant to be the scholarly or scientific contribution of individual authors to their professional fields. Papers were less formal than reports and did not require rigorous peer review.
This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.
The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.