ICE: Crossrail-style ‘heroic’ leadership no longer fit for purpose

The ICE’s second iteration of its A Systems Approach to Infrastructure Delivery report outlines eight principles for project clients to implement to ensure major projects are delivered on time and budget.

It takes lessons from five projects at various stages of delivery including Crossrail, Tideway, East West Rail, British Antarctic Survey’s Infrastructure Modernisation Programme and Anglian Water’s Strategic Pipeline Alliance. The ICE also looked at the way Costain has implemented a systems approach to project delivery.

One of the main recommendations is an overhaul of outdated leadership models.

The report concludes: “Leadership was a recurring theme across all of the case study interviews and roundtable sessions that made up the second phase of the review.

“Construction’s traditional, ‘heroic’ style of leadership is not fit for purpose for modern infrastructure projects, but the solution is not to introduce swathes of new controls and processes either.

“Instead, the sector needs to adopt leadership models that spread authority and empower highly competent individuals to take the key decisions in their areas of a project, while ensuring that everyone involved is focused on maintaining the integrity of the system to deliver the outcome demanded by its users and owners.”

It adds: “Scale matters. The larger and more complex a project, the less likely it is that it can be successfully led by a ‘warrior’ leader who can manage crises by force of will, or by a super-project manager who is focused overwhelmingly on process and deliverables.”

The report cites cost overruns and delays to Crossrail as an example for ensuring “the right skills and experience” are in place during the right parts of a project’s lifecycle.

It adds: “A retrospective review of Crossrail supports the case for planning for baton handovers to ensure that leadership has the right skills and experience to deal with the very different risks that need to be managed at different stages of a project.”

Many of Crossrail’s problems started when civils work drew to a close and systems integration begun. However, the ICE report adds that “simply planning for a handover between a civils team and a systems team would not […] have avoided all of the problems encountered by Crossrail”.

“Systems integration considerations need to be baked into a project leadership’s priorities from day one,” it adds. “The challenge for project sponsors is to ensure that all relevant voices are heard throughout the project lifecycle and that their prominence rises and falls with the changing risk profile.

“The concepts of ‘right team, right time’ and leadership baton handovers are useful, but should not be at the expense of planning for systems integration from day one.”

It continues: “One Crossrail manager suggested that we should think of two projects running in parallel, each with a highly experienced and skilled leadership, with the civils project finishing years before its systems counterpart. That, in turn, could facilitate a planned rise and fall of the prominence of voices within the overall programme, while ensuring that all key voices are heard throughout the lifecycle. This line of thinking is appealing.

“To execute this idea successfully on a multi-year megaproject would demand that care is taken to preserve corporate memory and pass learning forward. There is also likely to be a psychological challenge in convincing a successful leadership team to allow other colleagues to take prominence in the project. These challenges suggest that sponsors need to give greater attention to setting up projects to facilitate smoother leadership transitions.”

To read the report in full, click here.

ICE recommendations:

Like what you've read? To receive New Civil Engineer's daily and weekly newsletters click here.