Losing GRIP

[whole diary]

[Red Squirrel]

According to Rail 918, GRIP^▸ (Guide to Railway Investment Projects - Network Rail's process for project management of schemes through development and implementation) is no more. Is anyone sad to hear this?

[ChrisB]

I agree with NR^» (Network Rail - home page)'s comments frankly - it takes far too long & is far too costly. However, it's replacement may be worse, so I reserve my thoughts on its replacement until it's in the public domain

[stuving]

If the problem with GRIP^▸ (Guide to Railway Investment Projects - Network Rail's process for project management of schemes through development and implementation) was that people - and I guess he means NR^» (Network Rail - home page)'s staff - don't use it intelligently, how will replacing it help? I mean, does he think they can build the intelligence into the process instead? 

[Electric train]

If the problem with GRIP^▸ (Guide to Railway Investment Projects - Network Rail's process for project management of schemes through development and implementation) was that people - and I guess he means NR^» (Network Rail - home page)'s staff - don't use it intelligently, how will replacing it help? I mean, does he think they can build the intelligence into the process instead? 

Its not only NR staff, Suppliers (contractors) are ridged on not progressing unless a process is complete, often not trusting designs, data etc provided by another contract.  DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) and ORR^» (Office of Rail and Road, formerly Office of Rail Regulation - about) are rigorous about it.

There are some good parts in the GRIP process but I agree with Andrew Haines its un workably complex 

[Bmblbzzz]

If the problem with GRIP^▸ (Guide to Railway Investment Projects - Network Rail's process for project management of schemes through development and implementation) was that people - and I guess he means NR^» (Network Rail - home page)'s staff - don't use it intelligently, how will replacing it help? I mean, does he think they can build the intelligence into the process instead? 

If it's replaced by something simpler, with fewer steps, that should cut down the opportunities for unintelligent application. It should certainly reduce delays by reducing steps. If it's replaced by something simpler...

[stuving]

If the problem with GRIP^▸ (Guide to Railway Investment Projects - Network Rail's process for project management of schemes through development and implementation) was that people - and I guess he means NR^» (Network Rail - home page)'s staff - don't use it intelligently, how will replacing it help? I mean, does he think they can build the intelligence into the process instead? 

If it's replaced by something simpler, with fewer steps, that should cut down the opportunities for unintelligent application. It should certainly reduce delays by reducing steps. If it's replaced by something simpler...

What I thought was the issue - confirmed by that Andrew Haines quote - is that each of the stages is needed in some projects, and all are needed in big ones, but that in a lot of smaller projects some can be omitted (or signed off two at at time). So it's the driver's manual that needs changing - or who gets to be the driver.

[Electric train]

What I thought was the issue - confirmed by that Andrew Haines quote - is that each of the stages is needed in some projects, and all are needed in big ones, but that in a lot of smaller projects some can be omitted (or signed off two at at time). So it's the driver's manual that needs changing - or who gets to be the driver.

The GRIP^▸ (Guide to Railway Investment Projects - Network Rail's process for project management of schemes through development and implementation) process when applied as intended is a reasonable process.  GRIP is a series of "products" some mandated at certain stages other are optional.  One of the issues I have come across is where a Project Manager or a Scheme PM follow GRIP to the letter and not the intent of GRIP, even more worrying is when they insist on a product in GRIP but do not understand what they are actually asking form.  PM's are not the only one the Project Engineers can insist on a process because its in GRIP but actually may not be required.

GRIP does need an overhaul ................. there will be some railway project people at a loss or even bereaved when the GRIP goes or gets changed

[Red Squirrel]

In my understanding GRIP^▸ (Guide to Railway Investment Projects - Network Rail's process for project management of schemes through development and implementation) is particularly bad at dealing with schemes that are not sponsored by 'the railway'.

Such a scenario might occur when an external sponsor - let's say, for example, North Somerset - knows that it wants a new railway connection, and has commissioned reports which satisfy it that passenger numbers make it viable. The customer has in effect completed GRIP 1 and 2, and has determined in outline what it required of GRIP 3. They then have to pay NR^» (Network Rail - home page) to second-guess their conclusions, including NR determining whether the customer really needs the line at all. It's like going to a TV^▸ (Thames Valley) showroom and being asked by the sales person if you've considered reading a book instead. The process can take many years to get back to the point where NR agree that the customer was right to ask for a new line.

GRIP may have the potential to work very well when the railway is deciding its own priorities, but it doesn't seem to work when someone else is paying.

[Red Squirrel]

According to my spies, GRIP^▸ (Guide to Railway Investment Projects - Network Rail's process for project management of schemes through development and implementation) is to be replaced by PACE^▸ (Police & Criminal Evidence Act 1984about):

The GRIP (Governance in Railway Investment Projects) process has been used for the last 10 years, and is being evolved into PACE (Project Acceleration in a Controlled Environment). The purpose of which is to delivery projects quicker, at lower cost and higher quality. PACE will start to be rolled out from the beginning of next year, but there will be many projects still going through the GRIP steps as it will take time to get the new PACE process right.

Source: Toby Elliott, Network Rail

[Western Pathfinder]

One wonders if this will increase the pace that new projects progress?...

[Electric train]

One wonders if this will increase the pace that new projects progress?...

The limiting factors in rail projects are funding, which a change to GRIP^▸ (Guide to Railway Investment Projects - Network Rail's process for project management of schemes through development and implementation) may reduce overheads therefore more money to do more work.

However the biggest limitation is access ie no trains running to allow work to take place, some tasks can be done during while trains are running, but the ORR^» (Office of Rail and Road, formerly Office of Rail Regulation - about) are making in increasingly difficult to have staff out on the railway when trains are running