SUSTAINABILITY STRATEGY WORLD CLASS CIVIL ENGINEERING the future nvironment conomical ocial 1 Our Mission: Providing a sustainable business for the delivery of excellent Introduction projects Our Vision: Sustainability and environmental performance are often used interchangeably. To be the market leader in civil engineering To have a truly sustainable business, we must not only achieve (and exceed where possible) key social, environment and quality standards, but also meet Our Values and Behaviours: key financial commitments such as cash flow and profit. We aim to inspire all employees to meet our high standards The business has recognised for some time that our best performing projects and values in the execution of their duties, to act safely, to be not only have an excellent health, safety, environment and quality record but also environmentally and socially responsible through: perform well financially. Innovation In response to the sustainability challenge, in January 2013 Taylor Woodrow Partnerships launched its Sustainability Matrix. The matrix is part of core business strategy and People and Passion performance against each element of the matrix is discussed and reviewed monthly Strength, Diversity at the divisional management meetings. The matrix is comprised of a range of key and Dependability performance indicators (KPIs) split into three areas: • Economic • Social • Environment As referenced in Inside Civils, a competition was launched to create a logo which would help bring the strategy to life and capture the essence of Taylor Woodrow’s commitment to being a sustainable business; resilient and successful in the long term. Ella Secker (Consents Manager at NET) came up with the winning entry ‘SEE the future’ – the logo which is shown on the front cover. This brochure has been produced to demonstrate the full list of KPIs which are measured on a monthly basis and also introduce some case studies where projects have succeeded in this area. Graham Stanley Managing Director Civil Engineering Taylor Woodrow CONTENTS 2 Introduction to the matrix 3 Economic, Social and Environmental KPIs 6 Case studies from Victoria Dock Portal (Economic), Connaught (Social) and Nottingham Express Tramway [NET Phase 2] (Environment) 2 3 Sustainability Matrix ECONOMIC Aspect KPI Project/ Units Threshold Expected Aspira- PMR Frequency Owner Divisional tional The sustainability KPIs were launched in Ec01 Profit margin Contract gross profit as Project % Available on request Yes Monthly Chris January 2013, and several ‘core’ KPIs are a % of turnover (Transport) Boothroyd monitored and measured via the Project Project % Available on request Yes Monthly Chris Manager’s Report (PMR). (Energy) Boothroyd These core KPIs are collated into a league Ec02 Turnover Total annual turnover Sector £million 240-249 250-254 ≥255 No End of year Chris table to show the best and worse performing (Transport) Boothroyd projects based on the information provided Sector £million 30-49 50-99 ≥100 No End of year Chris (Energy) Boothroyd by the project managers. Some of the core Ec03 Order book The percentage of Divisional % 63-69 70-99 ≥100 No End of year Chris KPIs are also linked to performance related work in the order book Boothroyd incentives on the project, so there is a personal (Year 1) financial incentive to perform well for the Ec04 Customer % of feedback surveys Project % 100 100 100 Yes Quarterly Fred Garner, project’s senior management team. satisfaction undertaken [on-time] Dave Williams Performance against the KPIs is split into: Ec05 Supplier Supplier assessments Project % 90 100 100 Yes Bi-annual Gareth Threshold, Expected and Aspirational. performance completed per project Wagland, Fred Garner, Dave Threshold: Minimum, required level to avoid Williams threat to business. Eco06 Winning Work PRQUAL success rate Divisional % 70 80 90 No Monthly Gareth Wagland Expected: Level required for assured Eco07 Tender % of tenders won, by Divisional % 25 33 50 No Monthly Gareth sustainability in line with our best performing Success Rate value and number of Wagland competitors. bids Eco8 Cash Flow All payments received on Project Number 0 0 -7 Yes Monthly Chris Aspirational: Challenging but achieveable time, contractual terms of days Boothroyd level of performance - differentiation of late performance in relation to competitors. Eco9 EVA All projects to Project % 100 100 100 Yes Monthly Fred Garner, undertake EVA Dave Williams Eco10 Overhead % of turnover Divisional % Available on request No Monthly Chris Boothroyd Eco11 Productivity End forecast staff costs Project % Available on request Yes Quarterly Chris as a % of total costs Boothroyd Eco12 Productivity Turnover per overall Project Rate per Available on request Yes Quarterly Chris hours worked hour Boothroyd Eco 13 Quality – NCR NCR cost (£) as % Project % Available on request Yes Monthly Fred Garner, percentage of turnover Dave Williams, Emma McNab Eco 14 Quality – % of documents Project % 90 99 100 No Monthly Fred Garner, Documentation accepted first time Dave Williams, Submission e.g. ITPs Emma McNab Eco 15 Quality Defect % of inspections Project % 75-90 90-99 100 Yes Monthly Fred Garner, Free completed defect free Dave Williams, Emma McNab Eco 16 Programme SPI (cumulative) Project % 1 1 >1 Yes Monthly Fred Garner, - SPI Dave Williams Eco 17 Programme – Number of weeks Project Number < or = 8 < or = 4 < or = 4 Yes Monthly Fred Garner, accepted by since accepted pro- of weeks weeks weeks weeks Dave Williams client gramme Eco 18 Programme CPI Project % Improve- Improve Improve- Yes Monthly Fred Garner, (Improve- (cumulative) ment on -ment on ment on Dave Williams ments to CPI) previous previous 2 previous month months 2 months and CPI >1 4 5 SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT Aspect KPI Project/ Units Threshold Expected Aspirational Frequency Owner Aspect KPI Project/ Units Thresh- Expected Aspira- PMR Frequency Owner Divisional Divisional old tional S01 Close Calls Number of CCs/ Project Number Available on request Yes Monthly Fred Garner, Env01 Preventing Number of Project Number of 0 0 0 Yes Monthly Fred Garner, and PIs PIs raised of PIs/CCs Dave Williams, environmental environmental Dave Williams, raised Ian Williams pollution & incidents (Level Dawn Love nuisance 1 and 2 - VCUK SO2 Safety - Single lost-work Project Number 1 0.2 0 Yes Monthly Fred Garner, definition) accidents day/shift per 100,000 Dave Williams, frequency rate man hours Ian Williams (LTI) based on 1 Env02 Waste Construction Project m3 per 100k 5 3 <3 No Monthly Fred Garner, lost shift minimisation waste per 100k turnover (one month Dave Williams, / resource turnover in arrears) Dawn Love S03 H&S - Inspection – Project BRAG rating Available on request Yes Monthly Fred Garner, efficiency implementa- BRAG rating (Section) Dave Williams, Env03 Diversion of % diverted (based Project % 90 94 ≥95 Yes Monthly Fred Garner, tion Ian Williams waste from on revised HMRC (one month Dave Williams, performance landfill ruling) in arrears) Dawn Love S04 Strong visible Senior Divisional % of actual 80 100 >100 No Monthly Fred Garner, safety Management VS planned Dave Williams, leadership audits Ian Williams Env04 Electricity % electricity Divisional % electricity No -5 to -9 ≥-10 No Monthly Fred Garner, use (Scope 2 reduction (com- reduction change (in arrears) Dave Williams, S05 Corporate Charitable Project £ equivalent Available on request Yes Monthly Fred Garner, emissions) pared to baseline to -5 Dawn Love citizenship donations in contribution Dave Williams - rolling average) - charitable kind, e.g. time, as a % of donations & materials turnover contributions Env05 Business Reduce Divisional % reduction No -5 to -9 ≥-10 No Monthly Fred Garner, S06 Employee Overall Divisional % 83-85 85-89 ≥90 No Annual Fred Garner, Mileage business (compared to change (in arrears) Dave Williams, engagement satisfaction - Dave Williams, (Scope 1 mileage (normal- baseline - to -5 Dawn Love employee Elaine Grant emissions) ised to turnover) rolling average) satisfaction index Env06 Energy – im- Implementation Project % of plans in 100 100 100 Yes Monthly Fred Garner, S07 Staff turnover Total number of Project % 12 9 6 No Monthly Fred Garner, plementation of energy place Dave Williams, [attrition] leavers [resigna- Dave Williams, of manage- management Dawn Love tions last over Elaine Grant ment plan plan- include 12 months / by electricity, red average total diesel head count over the 12 months] Env07 Materials % of legal and Project % 100 100 100 Yes Monthly Fred Garner, S08 Community % people Project % 20-50 50-74 ≥75 Yes Monthly Fred Garner, - timber sustainable (in arrears) Dave Williams, Involvement undertaking Dave Williams, products timber procured Dawn Love Stand Out Make Elaine Grant from legal & a Difference sustainable days (SOMAD) sources S09 Considerate CCS score [note Project Score 37-41 41-44 ≥45 Yes Monthly Fred Garner, Env08 Water Reduce water Divisional % reduction 0 -2 -5 No Monthly Fred Garner, Constructors new scoring Dave Williams efficiency - use (normalised (in arrears) Dave Williams, Scheme system] construction to turnover) Dawn Love phase S10 Development % of completed Project % [com- 70-80 80-99 100 No Six-monthly Fred Garner Implementation Project % of plans in 100 100 100 Yes Monthly Fred Garner, of our staff 1:1s against pleted vs Collected by Dave Willimas of water place Dave Williams, planned [in planned] engagement management Dawn Love line with new representative plan system] Env09 Mayor of Accreditation Divisional Level achieved Bronze Silver