Strategy & Leadership

A change of course for Duke

March 31, 2011

Global

March 31, 2011

Global
Our Editors

The Economist Intelligence Unit

_____________________

Sometimes unexpected risks arise during project implementation that require executive teams to carefully balance the needs of the organisation against the needs of the community. Such was the case in April 2010, when Duke Energy was building a US$60m substation and transmission line in North Carolina to address load growth issues in the area.

The project was on schedule and under-budget. Land had been purchased and construction had begun, says Paul Kling, Duke’s director of project management and controls. But then a local group of Cherokee Indians raised a concern. They claimed that the hillside Duke had purchased for the station was “in view of sacred ground”, which made it off limits for construction.

The tribe brought a lawsuit against Duke, which shut the project down, and Duke senior executives immediately met with project team to devise a solution. Though Duke could have fought the lawsuit, the executives and project team approached the problem from a more holistic standpoint, seeking out a solution that would balance the objectives of the projects with the needs of the Cherokees.

After negotiating with the Cherokee tribe, and government leaders Duke opted to move the project to a new location. By making that decision, the company was able to build a new transmission station in time to address impending voltage issues, while accommodating the concerns of the Cherokee community.

“The project team invested a significant amount of time and effort into making sure we met everyone’s needs and got this project accomplished,” says Mr Kling.

Since Duke enables its business unit leaders to manage their budgets from a portfolio standpoint, rather than by individual project, the project team was able to manage changes to the remaining US$52m from the existing project plan. They were also able to shift additional resources within the project portfolio to account for any cash flow deviations that occurred as a result of the scope change. “Because our contingencies are built into the portfolio, we were able to reintegrate dollars from elsewhere in the budget and spend them more effectively,” says Mr Kling.

 

Enjoy in-depth insights and expert analysis - subscribe to our Perspectives newsletter, delivered every week