Bank Station Capacity Upgrade

Project Office
th
4 Floor – 10 King William Street
Safely
London EC4N 7TW

Table of Contents

1. Purpose ......................................................................................................................... 4
2. Scope ............................................................................................................................ 4
3. Glossary of Terms.......................................................................................................... 4
4. Continual Improvement .................................................................................................. 5
4.1 Customer Satisfaction ............................................................................................. 5
4.2 Non-Conformities and Corrective Actions ............................................................... 5
4.3 Supplier Performance ............................................................................................. 6
4.4 Preventive Actions .................................................................................................. 6
4.5 Lessons Learned .................................................................................................... 7
5. Management Review ..................................................................................................... 9
6. Accountabilities and responsibilities ............................................................................. 11
7. References .................................................................................................................. 11
Appendix A. Guidance on Running Lessons Learned Workshops .................................. 12

DRA-8798-PRO-G-001077 Revision 2.0 Page | 3

 Bank Station Capacity Upgrade
Project Office
th
4 Floor – 10 King William Street
Safely
London EC4N 7TW

1. Purpose
The purpose of this procedure is to define the monitoring, measurement, analysis and
improvement arrangements established to:
a) Demonstrate conformity to product requirements,
b) Ensure conformity of the Quality, Health & Safety, and Environmental Management
Systems, and
c) Continually improve the effectiveness of the Quality, Health & Safety, and
Environmental Management Systems,
on the Bank Station Capacity Upgrade (BSCU) project.

2. Scope
This procedure applies to the Dragados BSCU Quality, Health & Safety, and Environmental
Management Systems.

3. Glossary of Terms
3.1 Abbreviations
Abbreviation Meaning

BSCU Bank Station Capacity Upgrade

CAR Corrective Action Request
LL Lessons Learned
LU London Underground Limited
NCR Non-Conformity Report

3.2 Definitions
Term Definition

ASITE Document Management System used on the BSCU

project.
Management Review An evaluation of the ongoing suitability, adequacy and
effectiveness of management systems and the
identification of opportunities for improvement.

DRA-8798-PRO-G-001077 Revision 2.0 Page | 4

 Bank Station Capacity Upgrade
Project Office
th
4 Floor – 10 King William Street
Safely Together
London EC4N 7TW

4. Continual Improvement
The BSCU project fosters a culture of quality and improvement, emphasised to project staff
through induction and training. To continually improve the performance of the BSCU
Management Systems, the following measurements will be established:
• Information relating to Customer satisfaction i.e. customer perception as to whether
the organisation has met customer requirements.
• Analysis of non-conformities;
• Analysis of corrective action requests; and,
• Analysis of lessons learned.
The methods for obtaining this information are described in the sections 4.1 to 4.5 below.
Additionally, the information gathered as part of the monitoring activities detailed in sections
4.1 to 4.5 and the Audit & Surveillance process shall then be analysed by the Quality &
Assurance Manager on a monthly basis. The results of this analysis will be reported as part
of the ‘Quality & Assurance’ section of the Period Reports.

4.1 Customer Satisfaction

The BSCU project will be delivered via a collaborative approach, including the Client, the
Contractor and Subcontractors. It is therefore planned – see Alliance Protocol ref. LUSTN-
0008798-PTC-002864 – that both entities regularly monitor and review the effectiveness of
this collaborative working within their teams, and make recommendation for Best for Bank
improvement actions at Alliance meetings.
A formal Customer satisfaction survey will also be carried out following handover of the
complete project in accordance with Dragados S.A.’s procedure GP-4.04, Client Satisfaction.
The analysis of this satisfaction survey will be performed by the Quality & Assurance
Manager in conjunction with the Project Director and the Dragados UK Branch Quality &
Environmental Manager.
Complaints received from any source relating to any aspect of Dragados’s activities in
connection with the BSCU Project shall be reviewed by the Project Manager who will
determine appropriate Corrective Actions and actionees to address the complaint.
Corrective Actions arising from complaints shall be addressed in accordance with DRA-
8798-PRO-G-001786, Corrective Action Request Procedure.
It should be noted that:
• Any HR-related complaints will be managed in accordance with the relevant HR
policy or procedure.
• Any HSE-related complaints will be managed in accordance with the Environmental
Management Plan (ref. DRA-8798-PLN-G-001855) and the Code of Construction
Practice (ref. DRA-8798-PLN-G-001856).

4.2 Non-Conformities and Corrective Actions

The management of non-conformities, from identification, analysis, and action
implementation to effectiveness review is detailed in the Control of Non-Conforming Product
procedure, please refer to DRA-8798-PRO-G-001393.

DRA-8798-PRO-G-001077 Revision 2.0 Page | 5

 Bank Station Capacity Upgrade
Project Office
th
4 Floor – 10 King William Street
Safely Together
London EC4N 7TW

The management of corrective action requests, from identification, root cause analysis, and
action implementation to effectiveness review is detailed in the Corrective Action Request
procedure, please refer to DRA-8798-PRO-G-001786.

4.3 Supplier Performance

The management of supply chain performance, from identification / collation, analysis, and
improvement action implementation to effectiveness review is detailed in the Procurement
procedure, please refer to DRA-8798-PRO-G-000129.

4.4 Preventive Actions

The prevention of NCRs and CARs is achieved through the process of risk assessment,
thorough planning of work and the involvement of suitable competent personnel. Reference
should therefore be made to the Risk Management Plan ref. LUSTN-0008798-PLN-002908,
and the Project Controls Management Plan and Procedures ref. DRA-8798-PLN-G-000154.
The detailed analysis performed as part of the above-mentioned processes will allow for the
identification of actions to prevent potential NCRs or CARs. These will be recorded,
monitored and their effectiveness verified as per the defined process they arise from.

DRA-8798-PRO-G-001077 Revision 2.0 Page | 6

 Bank Station Capacity Upgrade
Project Office
th
4 Floor – 10 King William Street
Safely Together
London EC4N 7TW

4.5 Lessons Learned

Capturing lessons learnt is an integral part of this project, as it allows the identification of:
• what went wrong so that solutions can be developed to avoid similar occurrences in
the future, and
• what went well so that details can be shared to benefit the remainder of the project
and other similar projects.
The process for collating, analysing, implementing and recording Lessons Learned is
illustrated in Figure 1 below:
Lessons Learned
Engineering
Inputs HSQE Admin H&S Manager / Environmental Manager / Q&A Manager
Safety Manager

Projects / Company
Lessons Learned
(DRA SA UK and LU)

Safety Alerts and

Log LL in Register
Bulletins
(DRA SA UK and LU)

Supply Chain
Performance Review

Review Relevance
Package Post- “Open”
to BSCU Project
Completion Review

Customer Satisfaction
(Complaints /
Compliments)
Not Relevant
Trend Analysis of CARs Relevant
and NCRs
Determine potential Determine
Interested Parties Action(s) to be Implemented

CDM Action
No Action. For
All other
Consideration at
Actions
relevant phase

Transfer
Communicate to “For Follow-up Action information to
Identified Parties Consideration” Implementation Construction Team
via CDM Risk
Register

Communicate to Project
Team For Consideration into
No “Under Action”
Method Statements and
Toolbox Talks

Once the Identified Phase Risk Mitigation

of Works is Complete included in Method
Statements

Action
Implemented?

Yes

“Closed”

END

Figure 1 - Lessons Learned Process

DRA-8798-PRO-G-001077 Revision 2.0 Page | 7

 Bank Station Capacity Upgrade
Project Office
th
4 Floor – 10 King William Street
Safely Together
London EC4N 7TW

4.5.1 Collate
The Lessons Learned Register (ref. DRA-8798-RGT-G-003656) is populated with
information feeding from the following (non-exhaustive) list:
• Lessons Learned from other projects within Dragados SA and LU;
• Safety / Quality / Environmental alerts and bulletins from Dragados SA, LU and other
relevant Clients and Contractors;
• BSCU work package post-completion reviews 1 (refer to Appendix A for guidance);
• Supply chain performance reviews;
• Trend analysis of Corrective Action Requests and Non-Conformity Reports;
• Stakeholders’ satisfaction (complaints / compliments) reviews; and
• Lessons Learned sessions1 as requested by the Project Director or Project Manager.
The information logged includes details of the Project / Site and Contractor, identifies
whether it is safety / environmental / quality / security-related, provides a description of the
problem or success and its impact as well as details the recommendations drawn, and
provides key words to facilitate the search.
The lessons are initially logged as “Open”; their status will change when the analysis by the
HSQE team has been carried out.

4.5.2 Analyse
All input shall be reviewed by the HSQE Team within 48hrs of receipt to identify whether or
not it is relevant to the BSCU Project:
• Should it not be, the HSQE Team determines whether this information could
potentially benefit other parties – e.g. Dragados SA Head Office – and communicates
it to them where relevant.
• Should the information be relevant, the HSQE team decides on the best course:
1) No Action Required but To Be Considered – The HSQE team determines that
although no action is required at this stage, the information will apply at
specific phases of the project. The HSQE team shall then identify the lesson
as “For Consideration” and detail the phase(s) at which the lesson best
applies. These will then be taken into account when producing or reviewing
safe systems of work.
2) Action To Be Implemented – The HSQE team determines how the proposed
recommendations are to be implemented on the Project, also identifying
actionee(s) and target date(s). The lesson status is then changed to “Under
Action”.
A review of all safety-related lessons is also held periodically with the Health
& Safety Manager and Engineering Safety Manager to identify which lessons
should be translated as risks into the CDM Risk Register, and therefore be
mitigated as such.

1
These sessions are identified on the Schedule contained within the Lessons Learned Register.

DRA-8798-PRO-G-001077 Revision 2.0 Page | 8

 Bank Station Capacity Upgrade
Project Office
th
4 Floor – 10 King William Street
Safely Together
London EC4N 7TW

4.5.3 Implement
The HSQE team ensures that all identified actions are satisfactorily implemented, at which
point the status of the associated lesson is changed to “Closed”.
The BSCU Method Statement Procedure (ref. DRA-8798-PRO-G-000126) requires that all
Method Statements produced for the Project, whether by Dragados or its supply chain,
incorporate any relevant control measures detailed in the Lessons Learned Register (i.e.
those lessons identified as “For Consideration”), as well as any relevant control measures
detailed in the CDM Risk Register.
The implementation of Lessons Learned within Method Statements is also controlled by the
BSCU Submission Sheet, as the Construction Manager / delegated Package Manager’s
endorsement signifies that he/she has confirmed that, where relevant, the above has been
satisfactorily considered.

4.5.4 Record
All lessons identified throughout the project are recorded in the Lessons Learned Register
held in ASITE, ref. DRA-8798-RGT-G-003656. Additionally, all relevant supporting
information is stored in ASITE, with the associated hyperlink included in the Register.
The outputs from Lessons Learned workshops will be communicated to the LU Project
Manager for consideration and inclusion in LU’s Project Lessons Learned database in
accordance with WI 880 Lessons Learnt.

5. Management Review
5.1 Data Collation & Analysis
The project Quality, Environmental and Health & Safety Managers shall collate information
to enable an effective review of the project Quality, Environmental and Health & Safety
Management Systems to be carried out, and report this information using the BSCU
Management Review template ref. DRA-8798-TEM-G-004739.
The information reported shall comprise as appropriate, but not necessarily be limited to:-
• Status of previous Management Review actions.
• Project Quality, Environmental and Health & Safety policies and objectives.
• Results of audit reports.
• Evaluations of compliance with legal and other requirements (HSE-specific).
• Conformity of the works.
• Process performance.
• Key Performance Indicators relating to all QHSE processes.
• Status of corrective and preventive actions.
• Status of incident and accident investigations.
• Lessons learnt and actions taken.
• Results from Customer satisfaction surveys (Quality-specific), and communications
from external interested parties including complaints (HSE-specific).
• Progress on Management Systems development.

DRA-8798-PRO-G-001077 Revision 2.0 Page | 9

 Bank Station Capacity Upgrade
Project Office
th
4 Floor – 10 King William Street
Safely Together
London EC4N 7TW

• Changes (including organisational and legal) which could affect the Management
Systems.
• Recommendations for improvement.
• Any other data that the BSCU Project Director considers appropriate.

5.2 Annual Management Review

The annual Management Review shall be carried out during the first quarter of each
calendar year, comprising of the following attendees:-
• Dragados BSCU Project Director,
• Dragados BSCU Project Manager,
• Dragados BSCU Quality & Assurance Manager,
• Dragados BSCU Environmental Manager,
• Dragados BSCU Health & Safety Manager,
• Dragados S.A. Quality & Environmental Manager as appropriate,
• Dragados S.A. Health & Safety Manager as appropriate,
• Other attendees as determined by the BSCU Project Director.
As a minimum one week prior to the Review, the HSQE team shall communicate the BSCU
Management Review Report to all participants, detailing the information collated and the
proposed improvement actions. The Management Review will then aim to:-
• Analyse the information collected;
• Review the trends identified;
• Review the proposed actions to eliminate causes of potential nonconformities;
• Propose improvement actions;
• Recommend changes to Policies, Objectives and Targets; and
• Identify resources needs.

5.3 Review Output

The results of the Management Review shall be consistent with the project’s commitment to
continual improvement. They shall include all the agreed decisions and actions related to:
• Quality, Environmental and Health & Safety policies and objectives,
• the performance of the Management Systems and their processes,
• any resource needs.
These results are added to the revised BSCU Management Review Report, identifying the
actions (i.e. actions, actionees and target dates) to be implemented; this revised report is
then circulated to the BSCU Project Manager and Project Director for approval.
Any modifications to the Management Systems arising from the review shall be planned and
directed by the Quality, Environmental and Health & Safety Managers in such a way that the
Management Systems will maintain their integrities and proper functioning at all times.
The Management Review Reports shall be maintained in ASITE.

DRA-8798-PRO-G-001077 Revision 2.0 Page | 10

 Bank Station Capacity Upgrade
Project Office
th
4 Floor – 10 King William Street
Safely Together
London EC4N 7TW

6. Accountabilities and responsibilities

6.1 Accountabilities
The Dragados BSCU Project Quality and Assurance Manager is accountable for the content
of this document.
The Dragados BSCU Project Director is accountable for initiating the annual Management
Review.

6.2 Responsibilities
Responsibilities for monitoring compliance to the specific Quality, Environmental and Health
& Safety requirements reside respectively with the Quality, Environmental and Health &
Safety Managers.
The Dragados BSCU Project Quality and Assurance / Health & Safety / Environment
Managers are responsible for collecting and analysing the Quality / Health & Safety /
Environment Management Systems performance data respectively, and managing their
respective inputs and outputs to and from the Management Review.

7. References
The following documents should be referred to in the interpretation and application of this
document:-
• Dragados BSCU Audit & Surveillance Procedure, ref. DRA-8798-PRO-G-001076.
• Dragados BSCU Control of Non-Conforming Product Procedure, ref. DRA-8798-
PRO-G-001393.
• Dragados BSCU Corrective Action Request Procedure, ref. DRA-8798-PRO-G-
001786.
• Dragados BSCU Project Controls Management Plan and Procedures, ref. DRA-
8798-PLN-G-000154.
• Dragados BSCU Method Statement Procedure, ref. DRA-8798-PRO-G-000126.
• Dragados BSCU Environmental Management Plan, ref. DRA-8798-PLN-G-001855.
• Dragados BSCU Code of Construction Practice, ref. DRA-8798-PLN-G-001856.
• BSCU Risk Management Plan, ref. LUSTN-0008798-PLN-002908.
• Dragados S.A. Quality Management Procedure, GP-1.01 System Analysis and
Review.
• Dragados S.A. Quality Management Procedure, GP-4.02 Corrective and Preventive
Actions.
• Dragados S.A. Quality Management Procedure, GP-4.04 Client Satisfaction.

DRA-8798-PRO-G-001077 Revision 2.0 Page | 11

 Bank Station Capacity Upgrade
Project Office
th
4 Floor – 10 King William Street
Safely Together
London EC4N 7TW

Appendix A. Guidance on Running Lessons Learned

Workshops
This Appendix provides guidance as to how “Lessons Learned Reviews” can be carried out,
especially reviews of project phases / work packages post-completion.
This is a guidance, and therefore in no way prescriptive.
Chair and Participants:
Workshops should either be chaired by the Manager responsible for the area under review
(e.g. Package Manager for post-completion reviews), or an individual with facilitation skills
for more complex reviews.
In all cases, the Manager of the area under review should determine which individuals are to
participate in the workshop. Ensure all key individuals who participated in that phase / work
package are invited; should the list be too long, consider meeting with subgroups separately.
Pre-Workshop:
It might be worth collecting information prior to workshop to ensure a factual review e.g.
schedule performance, resource expenditures, customer satisfaction.
Agenda / Structure:
The Lessons Learnt Review agenda shall be structured to suit the phase of the project or
topic being reviewed.
For instance, for post-completion reviews, the different project lifecycle phases could be
structuring the session e.g. Design, Construction & Installation, Inspection & Testing,
Completion & Handover. Other headings such as Procurement, Commercial, Document
Management, Collaboration, etc. could be added to the above list as appropriate.
The review could then be structured as follows:
1) Ask the team to determine whether the objectives set for this project phase / work
package were achieved, and whether these were completed to schedule and budget.
2) Ask the team to brainstorm individually, and identify for each lifecycle phase:
a. What went well? e.g. good practices or behaviours that improved the project
efficiency or saved money.
b. What did not go well? e.g. deficient or non-effective processes or un-
collaborative behaviours.
c. Were there any problems or changes to the schedule / objectives / budget /
deliverables / etc. And if so, could they have been anticipated, or planned for
in advance?
3) Read back all individual notes to the whole team, and group them by topics within the
identified phases / processes.
4) Should there be a high number of themes, ask the team to prioritise them so that the
review can be focused on key topics.

DRA-8798-PRO-G-001077 Revision 2.0 Page | 12

 Bank Station Capacity Upgrade
Project Office
th
4 Floor – 10 King William Street
Safely Together
London EC4N 7TW

5) Ask the team to brainstorm as a group on what recommendations could be drawn

from the good and bad practices identified, as well as any actions to be implemented.
The review should be ended by a summary of all agreed recommendations and/or actions,
which should be transmitted to the HSQE team for record in the Lessons Learned Register.
For more complex Lessons Learned reviews, e.g. the review of the Design Compliance
phase, a more in-depth approach can be taken, by pre-empting a workshop with individual
interviews.
Logistics:
Ensure a meeting room with sufficient space is reserved, allowing for a collaborative
environment, and ensure that sufficient stationery is available (e.g. pens, post-it notes).
Circulate a draft agenda with the meeting invite to all participants one week before.
Do not forget to introduce all participants at the beginning of the session, and thank them at
the end of it.
Remind all participants that the session is a time for self-examination and suggestions for
ensuring the success of future project phases / works packages, and not a finger-pointing
exercise.
Participants should be encouraged to identify what other people did well, and examine their
own performance to identify how they could have handled the situation differently.
Remember to record (e.g. take a picture) the notes brainstormed by the participants.

DRA-8798-PRO-G-001077 Revision 2.0 Page | 13