Quality Helps Trim Millions From Interstate Project

Earlier in the decade, the Wisconsin Department of Transportation had an important decision to make. Milwaukee’s Marquette Interchange—originally completed in 1969 and Wisconsin’s major commerce roadway—was averaging nearly twice the amount of daily traffic it was intended for and accidents were increasing significantly. The structure essential to the state’s business and daily living was slowly crumbling. 

When the project plan was delivered in 2004, the expectations were to rebuild the interchange for $810 million and complete it by November 2008.  While it was by far the most expensive transportation project plan the state had seen, many experts said it could not be done. There was no way a project of that size could be completed for less than $1 billion.  And, four years?  Forget about it. (The original Marquette Interchange took five years to complete.)

But, on August 19, 2008, the official ribbon- cutting occurred in Milwaukee, delivering the interchange to the state of Wisconsin and its business people and tourists four months early.  And $10 million under budget. 

While the timely, under- budget delivery of this complex project might mystify some, the many contractors, state and city representatives, workers, and area citizens, found it not only possible, but also expected.

What appears to have saved money and time for the Marquette Interchange project was the formation of cross- functional teams, the painstaking use of project management and scheduling tools, and the insistence on calling all stakeholders in to get feedback and buy-in. 

For instance, the city of Milwaukee’s main concern was the possibility of a disruption to business:  Milwaukee had to stay open.  The solution was to keep two lanes functioning at all peak times and plan for reroutes and closures well in advance.  Major communication systems were put into place to make the population aware of any disruptions for the traffic flow. 

"All projects," said Robert J. Baylerian, 2008 preliminary round judge of ASQ’s Team Excellence Award Process, "require cohesive teamwork.  Without team- building or cohesiveness, a project—no matter what it is—will fail."

Baylerian mentions that cohesiveness is built and maintained through, "a constant flow of information going to all the stakeholders with a consistent message [to make a project work ].  If a project breaks down, it’s usually between the planning and executing phases.  The downfall is often in the form of a communication breakdown between the leader and team members and where these problems are not being addressed.  This leads to scope creep.  It’s not uncommon for a scope to change during a project, but if the fundamental problems are not addressed and solved, there is no way of moving beyond that point successfully."  

When teams rely on the employment of contractors, agencies, community groups, and other groups, the process becomes that much more complicated.  "Team communication is important to all five phases of the project management process," said Baylerian. "I can’t imagine what the project status reports looked like for this project."    

"I’d say this was pushing way out of bounds of business-as-usual," said Brady Frederick, project manager, Marquette Constructors, in a recent interview. "It’s completely made the contractors step back and rethink our processes and how we normally approach work and to reevaluate that and see how it fits within the urban environment."

"It’s obvious," said Jack Ford, 2008 preliminary round judge of ASQ’s Team Excellence Award Process, "all of the project managers did their homework, completing risk analysis—FMEA—up front. 

Baylerian and Ford are pleased of the project work, not only from a team and quality standpoint, but also but for their benefit as drivers.  They both work in Downtown Milwaukee.  And, working for BloodCenter of Wisconsin, they are also interested in the possible benefits a project like this has for other associations and government agencies.

"When it comes to government transportation projects," Ford said, "we usually hear about those that have gone wrong—the ones that go over budget, are completed well past the stated completion date, or are abandoned all together. But how many more best practices do we have of similar projects?"

It’s a good question. For the Wisconsin DoT, this project is a perfect opportunity to spread the word and share the practice. The Marquette Interchange team has spent $85,000 in advertising to share its story. "It’s money well spent," said Ford. "It’s great to hear a good news story, getting a best practice out of it."

The project has already created a lot of buzz.  State officials from around the United States have traveled to Milwaukee to discuss the project planning and systems with the major players.

In the months and years to come, more will be written about the Marquette Interchange project (look for a Wisconsin DoT penned article in Quality Progress next spring).  However, all involved won’t be able to discuss the past for very long.  The Wisconsin DoT is gearing up for another multi-million dollar project, one that will expand the interstate running just south of Milwaukee and moving toward the Wisconsin-Illinois border.