Printed from the ArchiMentor Knowledge pages on - www.archimentor.net

Project Extranets

• Introduction
• Advantages of project extranets
• Disadvantages of project extranets
• Other issues

Introduction

• The most common use of the term "extranet" is to describe a private part of a company's website, or a public part of a company's intranet, to which non-company users are granted restricted, i.e. password-protected, access. A typical example would be a product-supply company allowing customers to place and track orders directly, and to access the same detailed technical support information and equipment manuals as the company's own staff.
• The term "project extranet" is used, in the construction industry, to describe a system which allows members of the project team to share and comment on correspondence, drawings, and other project documents, held in a central data store. Project extranets are not new but the rapid increase in high-speed internet access has widened their availability and acceptance.
• Companies with an established track record in the UK construction industry include:
  4Projects [http://www.4projects.com/]
  Asite [http://www.asite.com/]
  Autodesk Buzzsaw [http://www.autodesk.co.uk]
  BIW Technologies [http://www.biwtech.com/]
  BuildOnline [http://www.buildonline.com/]
  Business Collaborator [http://www.businesscollaborator.com/]
  Cadweb [http://www.cadweb.co.uk/]
  Causeway Technologies [http://www.causewaytech.com/]
  Sarcophagus [http://www.sarcophagus.co.uk/]

Advantages of project extranets

• Members of the project team have immediate access to electronic versions of the latest project information without the need for the printing and distribution of hard copies.
• Most systems provide an inbuilt viewing capability allowing users to view documents, i.e. CAD drawings, without the need to purchase and install the software used to create the document.
• Most systems provide a facility for marking-up ("redlining") or commenting on project documents, thus speeding-up the commenting process.
• Most systems provide a "audit trail" tracking the issuing, commenting, and reviewing of project documents, and matching this to agreed project procedures and timing. For example, it is generally possible to "flag" incomplete tasks.
• Project extranets should, in theory, reduce the chance of mistakes and disputes caused by individuals working on "old" information.

Disadvantages of project extranets

• Many architectural practices with extensive experience of project extranets still (November 2006) believe that the advantages (see above) are often oversold by the system vendors and the benefits are frequently outweighed by very significant costs, mainly in the staff time needed to manage the systems. This has led to the creation, and subsequent expansion, of the Document Controller role in many large architectural practices.
• The notional advantages are particularly questionable for those companies with well-developed in-house Management Systems where duplication of data entry is inevitable. In some cases the in-house system may be superior to the project extranet imposed on the team, leading to increased frustration at the double-handling necessary to satisfy both systems. Companies with in-house systems generally experience increased administrative overheads on projects using extranet systems.
• The proliferation of systems causes particular problems when staff move between projects using different systems. Re-training will address some issues but the differences between systems with apparently similar core functions may be such that considerable time is wasted by the infrequent user when accessing an unfamiliar system.
• The usefulness of project extranet systems drops significantly when there is limited "buy-in" to the system, or where the system has been oversold. As soon as even a small number of project team members fail to participate in the system, the management overhead necessary to communicate with those members by "traditional" means rises dramatically. Experience shows that this is particularly marked with those systems that seek to include email correspondence within their controlled documentation, with project team members regularly circumventing the system because it is perceived as too cumbersome for what is viewed as "instant" communication.
• There are significant quality assurance issues regarding ownership of the data. Experienced practices have developed their own protocols to address this, normally involving the regular downloading of their data from the system, but these may have significant costs if they are to be kept usefully up-to-date. Inexperienced practices should be aware that the "small print" in an extranet agreement could prevent access to their own data and records should there be a dispute with the client or contractor. Architectural practices are strongly advised not to rely on any project extranet system as the sole repository of their project documentation.

Other issues

• Systems vary widely in their capabilities and in the technical support available from the system suppliers. Some simple systems are little more than sophisticated FTP sites. This is fine if the systems are cheap to install, easy to access, minimise double-entry of data, and expectations of their functionality have not been raised to unrealistic levels.
• The requirement to use a project extranet system will generally come from the client, project manager, or contractor, rather than the design professionals. Extranet suppliers encourage ongoing relationships with those who purchase their systems and architects are generally presented with a fait accompli in the choice of extranet supplier for a particular project.
• There may be some cases where the architect has an opportunity to influence the choice of extranet system. All systems have their good and bad points and a recommendation may be based on little more than the "devil-you-know" or how well a particular system integrates with the architect's own internal practices. There is currently no obvious "market leader".

© 2008. ArchiMentor.