Stakeholder Identification and Assessment
The salience model is a tool to categorize the stakeholders and decide upon which stake holder matter the most. Using the salience model, the stakeholders can be classified on the basis of their power, urgency and legitimacy in the organization. It has been found that the high speed rail unit has almost 319 stakeholders involved. Classified in terms of power, the HSR (HIGH SPEED RAIL) has 60 local governments including the ACT (Australian Capital Territory). In terms of urgency there are 151 stakeholder organizations and communities /groups including the Regional Development Australia committees and in terms of legitimacy the local people of Australia, the constructors, technology providers and High Speed rail operators are involved in the project. The government will be benefitted if the HSR becomes successful because after that the export and import business will be facilitated earning huge revenues. The organizations will be benefitted as it will improve the logistics services and the common people will be benefitted because the transportation services will be improved. There are some conflicts that need to be resolved such as in finding the highest level of government, the indifference in preserving the corridor will incur higher costs, the retention of the flexibility over route and station, requirement of the public funding and many others. I believe that the government should begin the project as soon as possible as it will facilitate the entire land of Australia and support the development of the country in many ways.
The frameworks are the European scene, the Japanese scene and the Australian scene. The involvement of the stakeholders is important in the frameworks. The strengths of this framework are thus – the transport, equality, stakeholder involvement, realistic analysis based on targets, and the main focus on the quality of life. There are also few shortcomings of the European framework- there are small number of targets. There is minimum mention of the impact of culture. In the Japanese framework, the quality of life is the main focus. It has strong focus on the natural disaster but it is more relevant in Japanese context rather than in the ECHSR. Thee stakeholder involvement rates are low. The Australian framework has the three pillars of sustainability and another strong point is it does not need increased resources with the increase in wealth. However, its weak point is there is also low level of stakeholder involvement because the government policies are pushed hard on the project. Each of the framework are considered to recognize the portions which will be useful for the ECHSR. I was not at first able to compile a large list because I did not have proper information and specifications on the requirements of sustainability. However, I reconsidered the past projects and reviewed the requirements of the clients’ fir sustainability. It helped me a lot.
Task 3: In this case I would recommend that the sustainability requirements of the minister must be incorporated in the project as soon as possible. Since the requirements are of high level in this stage, the industry experts help must be taken to achieve the expected outcomes. There are high chances that the sustainability requirements are considered vague more by the technical minded people. The concept design for the ECHSR can be regularly scrutinized to evaluate the scores of the projects in terms of sustainability requirements. In this case I would like to use the European framework in a modified way because it values the interrelations between human, physical and socio –economic levels. It has a strong socio- economic standpoint. I believe that HSR is a smart opportunity to advance and develop the regional areas of Australia. As far as the scenario change is concerned, no change in approach will be done. The focus will be on the sustainability requirements of the minister.
Development of Concept Development Process
have established the sustainability requirements developed for the minister. According to my opinion the establishment of a project top level spec is highly essential. It is known that the planning phase project team downstream is not to be connected with the requirements of sustainability for the HSR project. he various examples of the Maglev systems will also be provided and compared from the perspective of sustainability. However, I also think that the Maglev option does no match with the integration of existing network depends in the phase 1 report. Since Maglev does not exist in Australia, the reliance would solely be on the international sources. As of now the Phase 1 report is the only trustworthy source information so I would prefer to base my study on it. I personally believe that this project is like a public private partnership alliance. However, the final decisions will be determined by the cost required to fulfill the sustainability requirements. For instance, the entire project cost will rise if Maglev required more energy to operate. The project would ultimately need to construct renewable source more.
The tools such as the SOHO tool will be used by me. I might also use the BREEAM to identify the risks quickly and opportunities which are necessary to be included. The relevant parts of the entire design process will be filtered through these tools. It is true that the SOHO tool is much useful because it can be tailored accordingly to match the project. It is a great way to identify the opportunities which can be incorporated into the engineering design process. A formal design process is important and essential because it provides a kind of governance the project members can follow an adopt. The deliverables should be divided into 1 to 2 paragraphs talking about the contributions of this piece of work to the sustainability objectives of the entire project. The employees who are consistently performing on the project and making sustainability impacts positively. Since we are looking at the project from the perspective of sustainability, and making certain decisions in order to enhance and improve the sustainability of the project, it can be expected that the project outcomes will be sustainability oriented. However, at the same time I wonder how much of these sustainability concerns will be followed by the project sponsors. Therefore, the project executives must be careful while selecting the contractor. I also believe that we are privileged having the engineering manager who is truly taking the initiative to drive the project towards sustainability goals. it is quite rare. Having a really responsible person in the management is like a bonus for the project.
Since the storm and surge information has come late in the project the construction team would push back for the delay in the project. The renewable energy use might pose issues mentioned in the requirement part of the advising phase. There are chances that the construction team has started mobilizing to site and strongly has started clearing or excavating fill. The land which needs to cleared should be cleared in order to align with the new storm data. Public outrage can upsurge if the sensitive sites rest untouched by the project. The funding sources can also get impacted f the storm data is not incorporated. Nobody would want to invest in project which has high chances of being flooded out. By creating frameworks for operations and maintenance managers to use we have made their job slightly easier upfront, and it is then unlikely they will re-create these documents and take any of the sustainability aspects out. This is where overall governance comes in and needs to ensure that doesn’t happen. think this is the most crucial phase of the entire project because in this phase the motivation concerns of the employees are to be taken into considerations. They are taught to embrace and adopt the concepts of sustainable future.
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
